Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who drives a private taxi as his duties.

On February 2, 2010, the defendant, around 23:35 on Jeju-si, driven a private taxi in front of the stone at the crosswalk in front of the stone located in the Hando-si, which was owned by the defendant, and got a direct driving in front of the two-lanes of the two-lanes between the Do-si and the Do-si market company at the Do-si and the Do-si.

At the same time, crosswalks are installed on the front, so in such cases, there was a duty of care to confirm whether a person engaged in driving service is a person who gets on a road by reducing speed and by properly examining the right and the right and the right and the right of the road, and to drive safely.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and proceeded to the right side of the victim D (n, 21 years old) who walked on the crosswalk from the left side of the road to the right side of the road due to negligence, which led to the shock of the body side of the victim D (n, 21 years old).

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim D due to the above occupational negligence, such as the balone bones, and mathical salke and mathical malithal disease requiring stability for about six (6) weeks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the witness D;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. On-site map and related photographs;

1. Notification of traffic accident analysis results;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each written diagnosis;

1. Article 3 (1) and the proviso to Article 3 (2) and Article 3 (6) of the Act on Special Cases concerning Settlement of Traffic Accidents According to the relevant criminal facts, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The Defendant and the defense counsel asserted that at the time of the instant accident, the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion regarding the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion of the provisional payment order had been set to the right side of the vehicle after the victim had been set to the left right side of the accident vehicle with the front-down front-down with the front right side of the accident vehicle at the point beyond the crosswalk at the time of the instant accident. However, in full view of the aforementioned evidence, the Defendant was at the time due to the accident circumstance and