The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of BPoter Ⅱs.

On May 2, 2018, the Defendant driven the above cargo vehicles around 12:40, and turned back from the vacant ground above the above center to the front of the above center at the Yong-gun south of Yong-gun, Yong-gun.

At the time, there was a victim C (n, 86 years old) following the Defendant’s cargo vehicle, and in such a case, there was a duty of care to check whether a person engaged in driving a motor vehicle was a person to be in charge of driving the motor vehicle by checking the rear and right and right well and to prevent the accident in advance.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and did not look at the right and the right and the right and the right and the right, and had the victim receive the back part of the cargo of the defendant as the back part of the cargo of the defendant and exceeded the land.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim in the above occupational negligence during approximately 14 weeks of medical treatment.

2. The crime of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Bodily Injury) stated in the instant facts charged is a crime falling under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Article 268 of the Criminal Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under the main sentence of Article 3(2) of the same Act.

However, according to the written agreement submitted by the defendant to this court on October 11, 2018, it can be recognized that the agreement was reached between the defendant and the victim on behalf of the defendant after the prosecution of this case. According to the above facts of recognition, the victim expressed his/her intention not to want punishment against the defendant.

may be seen.

Thus, this case constitutes a case where the victim withdraws his/her wish to punish against the explicit intent of the victim. Thus, the prosecution of this case is instituted in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.