The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is the person who is engaged in driving a Bchip car owned by the Defendant.

At around 17:00 on August 7, 2018, the Defendant driven the above vehicle at the Seo-gu Seoul apartment entrance at the Cheongju-si, Seo-gu, Seowon-si, and proceeded by righting at a speed of about 20 km from the Ddong bank to the E-line outflow.

Since there are frequent moving of pedestrians and vehicles into the entrance of apartment entrance, a person engaged in driving motor vehicles has a duty of care to prevent accidents by properly viewing the front and rear left and safely manipulating the steering and brakes.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and went to the right side of the victim F (the age of 88) who was seated on the boundary of India, and conflict with the front side of the victim F (the age of 88).

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim due to the above occupational negligence, which requires 8 weeks’ medical treatment, such as a sacrife, sacrife, and sacrife salt.

2. The determination is an offense falling under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Article 268 of the Criminal Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under the main sentence of Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning

However, the record reveals that the victim expressed his intention not to punish the defendant prior to the prosecution of this case.

Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act because the prosecution procedure of this case is invalid because it violates the provisions of law.