The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving D-wing and freight cars.

On September 21, 2017, the Defendant driven the above cargo vehicle on September 12:37, 2017, and driven the front road of the Fri-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu, in the direction of the welfare center for the disabled in Northwest-gu, along two-lanes from the direction of the amended funeral hall for the disabled in Northwest-gu.

Since the defendant loaded the cargo 9.6m of large-scale tree in the foregoing cargo, the defendant had a duty of care to safely drive the said large-scale tree after taking necessary measures so that the said large-scale tree can be clearly fixed.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so, and caused the victim G (65) who was walking on the said large tree to protruding the right-hand side of the said large tree.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury among the left-hand fluoral leaves, side fluoral leaves, etc., which caused the victim’s permanent recognition function by occupational negligence as above.

2. The facts charged in this case’s dismissal judgment falls under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and it does not fall under the proviso of Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and thus cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under the same paragraph. This legal principle also applies where the victim’s bodily injury under Article 4(1)2 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents causes danger to his/her life or results in a imprisony or incurable disease.

According to the records, a letter of agreement was submitted to this court on May 23, 2018, which was after the prosecution of this case was instituted, and according to this, the injured party expressed his/her intention that he/she does not want to be punished against the defendant.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.