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

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On April 17, 2018, the Defendant was a person engaged in the operation of CMW car. On April 23:30, 2018, the Defendant driving the said car and driving it to the government from the e-ray side of the E-ray located in D at Yang-si along one-lane one-lanes of the two-lanes of the E-ray located in D at Yang-si, causing injury to the victim F (19 years old)'s driver's left-hand part of the driver's license plate of the f (19 years old) driver's f.o.b. the left-hand part of the f. driver's f.b. the Defendant suffered injury to the victim's G (18 years old) that requires approximately 12 weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. A survey report on actual conditions;

1. An accident scene photograph;

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

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

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of a credit cooperative without prison labor for punishment;

1. Since each of the reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is in a mutually competitive relationship, it is excluded from the scope of the sentencing guidelines in principle, but the scope of the recommended punishment corresponding to a single criminal offense was considered.

In the traffic crime group, the degree of violation of the duty of care of the defendant is more severe (the victim 2 suffered serious injury) in the mitigation area (the victim was not punished, January 1 to August), and the result is also serious (the victim 2 suffered serious injury).

However, both victims and the victims have agreed that they have not been punished for the defendant, that the defendant seems to have repented his mistake in depth as the first offender who has no criminal history, and that the damage of the victims is caused by the intrinsic nature of the Oralone as the next accident of Oralone.