However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The defendant is also a person engaged in driving CA car.

On March 5, 2017, the Defendant driven the said car at around 20:30, and driven the said car at around 20:30, and driven the two-lane road in front of the entrance of “E” D at the time of Seosan, along the one-lane distance from Daejeon to Seosan.

A person engaged in driving service has a duty of care to properly look at the front, rear and left, and accurately operate the steering system, brakes, and other devices of the vehicle, and to drive the vehicle according to the structure and performance of the vehicle.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and got the victim F (the age of 60) who crosses the road from the right side of the marina course to the left side by his negligence, as the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the death of the victim at the Gyang University Hospital located in 158, Seo-dong, Seo-dong, Seo-gu, Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon, on March 5, 2017 due to the above occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. A report on the occurrence of a traffic accident and a report on actual condition investigation;

1. A death certificate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on site photographs;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents According to the Selection of Punishment, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and the selection of imprisonment without prison labor;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence [the scope of recommended punishment] [the mitigated area of Class 2 (Death by Traffic Accidents) [the person subject to special mitigation] [including efforts to recover damage] [the decision of sentencing] decision, but the result of the crime such as the death of the victim due to the accident in this case does not be mitigated. However, the defendant reflects the mistake, the defendant agreed that the victim's bereaved family members and the bereaved family members, the vehicle is covered by the comprehensive automobile insurance, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the argument in this case, such as the defendant's age, the background of the accident, the details of the defendant's and the victim's fault, and the circumstances after the crime, are considered.