Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for one year.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a PP car.

On June 3, 2016, the Defendant driven the above car at around 17:10, and was under the left turn to the left at the entrance of the apartment complex C, Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, at the entrance of the above apartment, at 101.

In this case, the driver of the vehicle has a duty of care to accurately operate steering devices and brakes while driving the driver of the vehicle reduce the speed and driving the steering system.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and got off the front part of the said car, such as the victim D(61) who is the apartment security guard of the said apartment building, which was taking a seat above the road and removing the ice ice on the road at the time of the proceeding.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered a serious injury, such as an infertility brain injury, which cannot be recovered from the victim due to such occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The actual condition of traffic accidents;

1. An accident scene photograph;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

1. Article 3 (1) of the relevant Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, the selection of imprisonment without prison labor for a crime;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1)(a) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution has resulted in the Defendant’s scruptive consequence leading up to the injury of the victim’s infertility due to negligence. Accordingly, the victim’s family members as well as the victim’s family members appear to have suffered serious mental distress, and the victim’s family members have a high appraisal of damage. This seems to be due to the lack of reflective process that the Defendant asserted only his own position after the accident and recognized his/her responsibility in light of the content and attitude of the statement in this court. However, the entry of the vehicle is very unfavorable.