However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The defendant is a dump truck driver.

On March 29, 2015, the Defendant driven a dump truck above around 07:10, and driven a four-lane road in front of the Puun apartment, which is 179, Kimpo-si Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, along the two-lanes in the direction of the long-term multi-distance distance from the long-term distance direction to Kimpo-ro.

At all times, there is an intersection where signal lights are installed, so there was a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by reducing speed and driving the signal well by driving the driver.

Nevertheless, even if the Defendant neglected this and reported that the signal, etc. is changed to yellow signal, the Defendant was driven by the victim D(21 years old) driving on the right side of the intersection, which was going to follow the straight signal from the right side of the intersection, and received dump truck fronter of the Defendant’s dump truck.

Ultimately, the Defendant, by negligence in the course of performing such duties, sustained injury to the victim, such as salt, tension, etc. of the bones of neck, which requires medical treatment for about three weeks, and injury to the victim F (21 years of age) who was on board the damaged vehicle and G (21 years of age) who was in need of medical treatment for about three weeks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs, dynamics, caps and other closure photographs;

1. Article 3 (1) and the proviso to Article 3 (2) 1 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

2. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition.

3. Selection of alternative imprisonment without prison labor;

4. The sentence shall be determined in the same way as the sentence is ordered, in consideration of the fact that the defendant's error in sentencing is against depth, that the victims and the victims have agreed smoothly, and that there is only the previous conviction of a fine, etc., under Article 62 (1) (The following favorable circumstances) of the Criminal