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

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a D bus.

On May 21, 2015, the Defendant driven a bus on May 21, 2015, and proceeded bypassing the three-lane road in front of the E in front of the Southern-si from the direction of the Guri-si to three-lane in the direction of the lower parking lot.

At that time, because a bicycle driven by the victim F (the 46-year old) is driving in the same direction, there was a duty of care to check the safety of the course by checking well the right and the right and the right before the right and the right and the right of the bicycle.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected it and caused the victim to receive the front part of the bus with the right side of the bus, which is due to the negligence of bypassing it, and followed the front right side part.

Ultimately, at around 21:09 on May 21, 2015, the Defendant caused the victim’s death by occupational negligence, such as a tension with a tension at the Hanyang University Hospital located in Mari-si, 153.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statements made by witnesses G and H in the second protocol of the trial;

1. Each police interrogation protocol against the accused;

1. The police statement concerning G;

1. The written statement of the defendant;

1. An actual survey report and a report on the occurrence of a traffic accident;

1. A traffic accident analysis report;

1. A death diagnosis report and a written record of autopsy;

1. Stickbox CD images, strawbox images of vehicles, and capsizing the stude;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of each site, the location of witnesses, etc., photographs of the victim vehicle, and body photographs;

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

1. The defendant and his defense counsel regarding the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 62(1) of the suspended execution of the Criminal Act are not conflicting with the bicycle driven by the defendant, but the bus driven by the defendant does not conflict with the bicycle driven by the victim, and the victim goes beyond the above bicycle, and the accident of this case occurred, and thus, the defendant