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 for C.

On May 4, 2015, at around 15:17, the Defendant, at the time of Kimhae-si D, proceeded with the roads in front of the Eriju station located in Kimhae-si, Kim Jong-si, from the third-way distance protection area to the Criju-si.

At the time, the crosswalk with signal lights is installed, so in such cases, the above driver is well able to see the front door, and even if the driver has a duty of care to safely conduct the accident according to the signals, and to prevent the accident, the defendant neglected to do so, and caused the victim F (the age of 82) who was standing on the stop signal to go beyond the road by shocking the victim F (the age of 82) who was standing on the front side of the vehicle for the defendant's driving.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury, such as T7 parts of T7 and cage cages, which require medical treatment between approximately 12 weeks, due to the above occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A traffic accident report, a traffic accident actual investigation report, and an accident-related photograph;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the General Medical Certificate;

1. Article 3 (1) and the proviso to Article 3 (2) and Article 3 (6) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents According to Relevant Acts concerning facts constituting an offense, Article 268 of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (the following grounds for sentencing), which are favorable to the defendant;

1. The range of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the recommended sentence] general traffic accidents in general shall not be subject to punishment in the area where mitigation is limited (from one to six months) (special mitigation) in the first category of traffic accidents;

2. The instant traffic accident, which was determined by the sentence, is due to the negligence that the Defendant did not properly verify whether the Defendant was a victim walking along the crosswalk, and the degree of the Defendant’s breach of duty of care is difficult, and the degree of damage to the victim is very serious.