The defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won. If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of Poter Cargo Vehicles B.

At around 13:53 on May 20, 2020, the Defendant was driving the said vehicle on the front road of the Gyeonggi Pyeong-gun, and was driving the said vehicle on the front side of the Gyeonggi Pyeong-si, and was driving on the front side of the said vehicle on the front side of the Sin-si.

The accident point is a road of one-lane, and there are people who walk to see agriculture in the surrounding area, and therefore, the person engaged in driving service has a duty of care to see the front-way and accurately operate the steering and steering system and to proceed with it at a safe speed and in a safe manner.

Nevertheless, due to the negligence of neglect and progress of Jeonju City, the victim D ( South, 73 years old) who was coming to the right-side side of the direction of progress was shocked by the right-side side of the vehicle.

In the end, the victim suffered two weeks of injury from the 2nd century due to drillings, pelvis and other unknown parts, tensions and tensions.

In such a case, the victims should immediately stop and take relief measures, but they escape from the site without any measure.

Summary of Evidence

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to police statements, traffic accident reports (1) (2) to the defendant's partial statement, statement D, traffic accident report, diagnosis of traffic accident occurrence report, etc.;

1. Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning the relevant criminal facts and the selection of punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Whether the defendant had the intention to flee under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, or the victim of the victim's defense counsel at the time of the instant case was in a swimming forest adjacent to the road at the time of the instant case, and accordingly, the defendant did not have any awareness of the shocking facts of the victim.

Therefore, the defendant did not have the intention of escape after the accident.

Judgment

The evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court is recognized.