Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a driver of a cargo vehicle B and C, and is a driver of a cargo vehicle.

On November 4, 2017, around 11:10 on November 4, 2017, the Defendant got D’s front crosswalk C, in Yongcheon-si, Youngcheon-si, to make a right-hand by the E-section from the boundary of the new net distance.

Since there is a signal apparatus installed, a person who intends to make a right-hand side of a crosswalk is a duty of care to proceed in a way that does not obstruct the passage by examining whether there is a pedestrian crossing in accordance with the direction of signal apparatus.

Nevertheless, the defendant's negligence of neglecting this and proceeding with the victim F (11) who is crossing the crosswalk pursuant to the new subparagraph at that time, conflict with the front wheel part of the bicycle, which is the back loaded on the right side of the above cargo.

As a result, even if the defendant suffered from an injury on a stuff not to the right side, which requires a treatment of about two weeks, the defendant does not take necessary measures, such as aiding the damaged person.

I escape as it is.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made to F;

1. A survey report on actual conditions;

1. On-site photographs of the accident site and images of CCTV for crime prevention;

1. Medical certificates [The defendant and his defense counsel] Since extremely annoyed treatment is needed to the extent that it cannot be evaluated as an injury as provided by Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act on the right side of the victim caused by the accident of this case, since the defendant and his defense counsel do not constitute a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes)

The argument is asserted.

However, the evidence as indicated in the judgment can be comprehensively taken into account the following circumstances, i.e., ① the victim of the 11-year-old age who was suffering from a collision with another at the time, seems to have a significant impact on the road, such as the victim of the 11-year-old age who was suffering from a collision with another at the time, and ② the defendant confirmed that the victim of the accident of this case suffered from a misperci