A shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for eight months, and by imprisonment without prison labor for six months.

, however, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Defendant

A is a person who is engaged in driving of freight cars, and Defendant B is a person who is engaged in driving of cars EM7.

Defendant

A, around 17:55 on December 17, 2015, driving of the above cargo vehicle and driving along the two lanes in front of the G in Yongcheon City F, Yongcheon City, along the two lanes from the west to the west.

Since there is no signal, traffic control is not performed, in such a case, the driver has a duty of care to prevent accidents by entering the intersection after checking whether there is a vehicle to enter the intersection before entering the intersection or temporarily stop and confirming whether there is a vehicle to enter the intersection.

Nevertheless, Defendant A neglected to perform the duty of the Jeonju City and caused the victim to be loaded on the road with the front part of the said cargo vehicle, instead of finding it late after the driver was driven by the victim H(63 years of age) who was on the right to turn to the lusium from the lusium on the lusium on the part of the said cargo vehicle.

Defendant

B is driving the car at the same date and at the same place, and the car has been driven in one way.

At the time, the road is night and it is difficult to secure the view due to the absence of street lights. At the front of the road, Defendant A’s cargo vehicle was stopped without emergency lights, and thus, in such a case, Defendant A had a duty of care to cope with the unexpected situation and prevent accidents by reducing speed and checking the safety of the course while living well at the front of the road.

Nevertheless, Defendant B neglected to perform the duty at the preceding week and did not avoid the victim who was faced with the cargo vehicle on the road as above due to negligence, and served the victim's head on the said passenger vehicle.

As a result, the Defendants caused the victims to suffer from the above occupational negligence, i.e., e., brain damage.