Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for six 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

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving CK5 cars.

On February 27, 2017, the Defendant driven the above car at around 10:10, and continued to run the road near the new elementary school of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, to the entrance of the market instead of the chilling apartment.

At all times, there has been a sign prohibiting entry into the part of the defendant on one-way road to prohibit entry into the part of the defendant, so the driver of the motor vehicle is prohibited from entering the motor vehicle according to the above sign, and there has been a duty of care to prevent accidents by accurately manipulating the steering gear and brakes.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to enter the road to be prohibited from entering, and thereby was found to have received the management of the public parking lot by the Korea Facilities Management Corporation, which was the victim F (5 years old), in turn, of D SJ50 R two-wheeled vehicles and ECA 110 two-wheeled vehicles.

As a result, the Defendant suffered from the above victim F by negligence in the above occupational negligence the injury of the above victim F, i.e., cutting the body of the right frame and the right kidne in need of treatment for about 12 weeks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the actual survey report, a traffic accident situation report, a diagnosis certificate, and photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 3 (1) and the proviso to Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents Aggravated Punishment, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment without prison labor, concerning criminal facts;

1. The occurrence of the instant accident due to the Defendant’s gross negligence for the reason of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, and the fact that the victim suffered serious injury due to the instant accident is considered disadvantageous. The Defendant recognized the facts of the instant crime and opposed to the mistake, the injured party by agreement with the victim does not want to be punished against the Defendant, and the Defendant was punished once by a fine for a violation of the Labor Standards Act in 2007.