Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On March 17, 2017, the Defendant driven a B car on March 17, 2017, and driven a four-lane road in front of the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Nam-gu, Seoul, along four-lanes in the direction of the entrance of the bank village from the boundary of the entrance.

Since a crosswalk and signal are installed, there was a duty of care to ensure that a person engaged in driving service is able to live well on the right and the right and the right, and safely proceed in accordance with the new code.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and did not avoid the victim D (44) crossing the road in a state of getting out of the crosswalk due to the negligence of proceeding, even though the vehicle driving signal was a stop signal, and had the victim go beyond the road due to the front glass of the Defendant’s car.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim due to the above occupational negligence, i.e., an injury to the victim, i.e., an external wound with no wife in the middle of six weeks in need of open medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. E statements;

1. A survey report on actual conditions;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each written diagnosis;

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

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the Aggravated Punishment of the Aggravated Punishment of the Aggravated Punishment Order is that the Defendant, while driving a motor vehicle, neglected to perform his/her duty at the front time while driving the motor vehicle and proceeding in the same manner as it is a pedestrian signal, and the victim was injured by the victim due to the shocking of the victim who was walking on the crosswalk, and the crime of this case was not easy, but is not agreed with the victim. However, even though the Aggravated Motor Vehicle was covered by a comprehensive insurance, it is deemed that there is no obstacle to the recovery of the victim's damage, and after