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

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a low-speed car B.

On September 27, 2014, at around 09:50 on September 27, 2014, the Defendant driven the above car and proceeded the front distance of the literature center, which is located in the non-driving of Pyeongtaek-si, from the troke to the shot on the west and turned to the left.

Since the left turn is a prohibited area, there was a duty of care to make a left turn to a person engaged in driving service.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to turn to the right and received the front part of the D Atop car driven by the injured party C (A. 70 years old) who is driving in the straight signal from the right side of the D to the right side of the Dtop car, which was driven by the injured party C (A. 70 years old).

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury, such as duplicating cages, including two cupages that require approximately 8 weeks of medical treatment from the above occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement regarding C;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

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

1. A suspended sentence shall be imposed as ordered in consideration of the following facts: although the defendant's liability for the crime of inflicting eight caution injury on the victim while driving a vehicle in violation of the notification of the reason for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act is not minor, the suspended sentence shall be imposed as ordered in consideration of the following factors: the defendant's vehicle was covered by comprehensive insurance with the victim; the defendant's vehicle was covered by comprehensive insurance; the defendant'