The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a person engaged in driving a vehicle of QM3.

On April 1, 2016, at around 22:35, the Defendant driven the said car on the front of the crosswalk of the stop tunnel intersection in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, and proceeded bypassing it to the third intersection in the direction of Young-dong from the flood of the two telephone stations.

In such cases, since there is a pedestrian crossing, the driver of the vehicle has a duty of care to prevent the accident in advance by safely driving the vehicle, such as checking and driving of the vehicle after stopping in front of the pedestrian crossing.

그럼에도 불구하고, 피고인은 이를 게을리 한 채 그대로 진행하다가 급정지를 한 과실로 마침 진행방향 우측에서 좌측으로 횡단보도를 건너던 피해자 D(45세)이 이를 보고 급히 피하면서 몸이 심하게 삐끗하게 하였다.

In this sense, the Defendant suffered approximately two weeks of treatment to the victim through occupational negligence as above, such as “the right side and the left-hand side,” which require approximately two weeks of treatment.

2. Determination

A. In a criminal trial, the finding of guilt must be based on evidence of probative value, which leads to a judge to have a conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt, and, in the absence of such evidence, there is no doubt of guilt against the defendant.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

B. The Defendant’s assertion argues that the accident occurred at a point beyond the crosswalk, and that at the time of the police investigation, the accident occurred in the vicinity of the crosswalk, and that the Defendant stated it as an accident at the crosswalk without accurately recognizing the differences in criminal punishment.

The victim also appeared as a witness in this court, and the accident occurred at a point where one meter has passed at the crosswalk, and the investigation agency.