The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Criminal facts

On May 2, 2017, the Defendant, while driving a CK3 vehicle from the front side of the CK3 vehicle from the Busan-dong community service center located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Busan-do, on the 14:32th day of May 22, 2017, the Defendant escaped without taking necessary measures, even though D (10 years of age) in the above place, which is a child protection zone, was inside the building on the right side of the Defendant’s proceeding, caused the traffic accident involving the injury such as salt, tension, etc. of the shoulder, which requires treatment for about two weeks, to the right side of the vehicle.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The result of the CD verification by this Court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Reporting the occurrence of a traffic accident, a survey report on the actual condition, a photo at the scene of an accident, or a caps of CCTV images;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on medical certificates and medical treatment records;

1. Article 148 of the relevant Act and Articles 148 and 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of fines concerning facts constituting an offense, and the selection of fines;

1. Penalty fine of KRW 3,000,000 to be suspended;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Although the reason for sentencing under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Code of the Suspension of Sentence was due to the driving of the defendant, the injured child was asked at the end only to be fine, and did not take appropriate measures such as communicating the victimized child’s guardian, and left the scene without deep attention. In particular, the accident site is the child protection zone and the injured child was the 10-year-old child, so it was more necessary for the defendant to have taken necessary measures, such as aiding the victimized child. However, the defendant did not recognize the fault of the victimized child in the traffic accident of this case, but rather asked the state of the victimized child who was left the vehicle as above, and the defendant agreed that the injured child was punished by the victim only after the accident of this case.