Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who operates B vehicles.

On April 4, 2019, the Defendant driven the above vehicle at around 08:30 on April 4, 2019, and was in the operation of two lanes from strengthening the D-W road located in Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Gyeonggi-do to Seoul at a non-speed speed.

The above road is a road of the two-way line, and at the front of the road, a crosswalk with signal lights installed.

In such cases, it is necessary to confirm whether a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to reduce speed and to set up a road in good condition, and to prevent accidents in advance by driving a motor vehicle safely according to traffic signals.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and continues to proceed at the same speed even though the vehicle signal is changed to a stop signal.

According to the pedestrian signals, the victim E (n, 44 years old) who cross the crosswalk from the right side to the left side was found late, and a sudden operation was made to avoid this.

However, the defendant's driver did not avoid the situation and she got the victim's left side bridge in front of the defendant's vehicle and went beyond the ground.

As a result, the defendant suffered from occupational negligence the injury that requires approximately 6 weeks of medical treatment, such as cutting the upper half of the left-hand aggregate.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. Application of field photographs and diagnosis reports (E)-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 3 (1), the proviso to Article 3 (2) and Article 3 (1) 1 and 6 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the Selection of Imprisonment without prison labor for a crime;

1. The Defendant on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act continues to proceed at the same speed even though the vehicle signal was changed to the stop signal.

In accordance with pedestrian safety, the victim who has dried the crosswalk was injured by the victim, and the degree of the violation of duty of care is not easy, and the degree of the victim's injury is very important, which is disadvantageous to the defendant.