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

However, 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 engaged in rocketing taxi driving service.

On July 15, 2013, at around 15:03, the Defendant operated the intersection, which is two-lanes of the distance in front of the museum in the Simsan-dong, Kim Jong-si, Kim Jong-si, at a speed of about 25km in speed from the direction of the Gumsan-si to the direction of the Kimhae Museum, depending on two-lanes.

At all times, there was a duty of care to reduce speed and to ensure safe operation of signals for those engaged in driving on a long-distance intersection where signal lights are installed.

Nevertheless, even though the vehicle signal was a stop signal, the Defendant got the victim from the front side of the DNA driving by the victim C(59 years of age) who was driven by the victim C(59 years of age) in accordance with the new line from the same parallel side of the Dong-dong, by the negligence of the sudden progress, to go beyond the floor.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as the victim’s 10 weeks of medical treatment, by negligence in the above business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. C’s statement;

1. A report on the occurrence of a traffic accident and the actual condition investigation report on a traffic accident;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Application of statutes on investigation reports;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents Aggravated Punishment, and Article 268 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act include the following: (a) the Defendant, on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, who committed the same offense even though he/she had been punished by a fine due to the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents even in 208 and 2011, is disadvantageous to the Defendant; (b) it is against the Defendant’s wrong recognition; (c) the vehicles are subscribed to the taxi mutual aid association and agreed with the victim.