The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is engaged in driving of the Bwing and C 3 cargo vehicles owned by the Defendant, and the Defendant, around October 4, 2015, at around 01:39, the Defendant, along with the vehicle behind the Han River project headquarters located in Seongdong-gu Seoul, Seongdong-gu, Seoul, along with five-lanes of the road located in front of the Han River project headquarters in the same direction as the speed of the motor vehicle at an unexpected speed depending on the speed of the five-lanes from the bend from the bend. In such a case, the Defendant is obliged to pay a duty of care to prevent accidents by securing the necessary distance to avoid collision with the motor vehicle running the motor vehicle in front of the vehicle in front.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not discover that the D-A-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-Wur-W

As a result, the Defendant, by negligence in the course of performing his duties, damaged the victim C by causing each injury to the victim, such as satise and tension of the bones of trees requiring approximately three weeks of medical treatment, satise and tension of the bate bones, which requires approximately two weeks of medical treatment to the victim E, and satise and dume of the satise, which requires approximately three weeks of medical treatment to the victim F, and damaged the damaged vehicle in an amount of KRW 5,312,438 of its repair cost.

2. The determination is the case that falls under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and Article 151 of the Road Traffic Act, and thus, cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under the main sentence of Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents. According to each of the agreements bound in the trial records of this case, the victims can be acknowledged as having withdrawn their wish to punish the Defendant on December 3, 2015 and March 24, 2016.

Therefore, Article 327 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act is applicable.