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

Punishment of the crime

On October 9, 2015, the Defendant driven the above-mentioned vehicle around 04:59 on October 9, 2015, and proceeded with the four-lanes in front of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as a shooting range of the island at the Sungdong-do.

At that time, there is a place where the center line of yellow solid lines is installed, and the victim E(23) driving is proceeding in the opposite lane, so in such a case, the defendant engaged in driving duty has a duty of care to drive the center line and safely.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected the above duty of care and neglected to turn to the left, caused the damages to the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle due to the negligence, and caused the injury to the victim E, such as the right side and the pelle of the executive opening, which requires approximately 12 weeks medical treatment, and suffered the injury, such as the 16-day left pelle of the left pelle, which requires approximately 16-day medical treatment to the victim G (Y, 24 years old) who is the son.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. A traffic accident report, a traffic accident report (1) (2) and an investigation report;

1. Each photograph;

1. Application of statutes to copies of each written diagnosis;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Articles 40 and 50 (Selection of Imprisonment without prison labor) of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes Act / [the scope of recommendation] The basic area ( April -10) of the type 1 of the ordinary traffic accident [the decision of sentence] / [the decision of sentence] that the defendant has no record of punishment other than the fine on two occasions, the defendant has no record of punishment other than the fine on two occasions, the victims have committed a crime and has a depth, and the fact that the victims are covered by a comprehensive insurance, etc., shall not be considered in light of the circumstances.

However, the defendant's failure to perform his duty at the front time and the failure of the central crime caused by his failure to do so is not less vulnerable, and 91 years have yet to occur.