except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a Doz car.

On December 30, 2014, the Defendant driven the said car on December 20, 2014, and turned the front road of the F pharmacy in Seojin-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City to the sand market from the direction of the Alley-gu to the direction of the sand market at a speed of about 67km in proportion to one lane.

At the same time, a crosswalk without signal lights is installed in the front, and there was a duty of care to drive safely, such as checking whether a person engaged in driving service is a person to reduce the speed and to check well the right and the right.

Nevertheless, by negligence, the Defendant neglected this, did not discover the victim G(S, 42 years of age) from the F pharmacy to the well-dying, and went beyond the floor by obtaining the body of the victim from the front part of the said car.

Ultimately, at around January 11, 2015, the Defendant caused the death of the victim who was receiving treatment at an I Hospital located in He of the Y in the Y of the Y of the Yan-gu of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City due to the foregoing occupational negligence due to the cardiopulmonary suspension by the pre-pulmonary death.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to J police officers;

1. A traffic accident report, a traffic accident report, and on-site photographs;

1. A criminal investigation report (CCTV perusal) and CCTV images;

1. Investigation report ( Results of the comprehensive analysis of traffic accidents conducted by the Road Traffic Authority);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a death certificate;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents in the Selection of Punishment, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and selection of

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter the following sentencing grounds) of the suspended sentence (the scope of recommendations) (the grounds for sentencing) general traffic accidents (the scope of recommendations) and the scope of comparative sentencing between the mitigated area (Articles 2 and 10) [Special Mitigation] and the mitigated area (Articles 4 and 10): April 10 [Pronouncement Decision] - The circumstances unfavorable to the defendant: pedestrians.