If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

The defendant is a driver belonging to the high-speed tourism in the Geum River, who is engaged in bus driving service.

On 30, 2016, the Defendant driven the above vehicle on 07:00 on 30, 201, while driving the Doma distance in Seo-gu Bankruptcy, Seo-gu, Daejeon using one lane in the direction of the Doma four-lane in the direction of the Doma four-lane in the direction of the Doma four-lane, and going to the left at the right and right and right and right and right and right and right and right and right and right and right and right and right and right and

Since there are signals installed, it is a distance crossing where traffic is controlled by signal apparatus, the Defendant had a duty of care to check whether there is a pedestrian who flabs the road along the crosswalk, and to safely proceed with it, and to prevent the accident from spreading.

Even if the Defendant neglected to do so, the Defendant received the victim D (the age of 71) who crosses the crosswalk along the crosswalk at the time of a pedestrian color signal from the left-hand side of the running direction of the Defendant, by negligence, to the front left-hand side of the Defendant’s vehicle.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the death of the victim D due to the above occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspect of the accused;

1. Statement protocol (short traffic) made by the police to E;

1. A traffic accident investigation report and an accident scene photograph;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to death certificates;

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 fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The Defendant and the defense counsel asserts that the instant traffic accident was wholly caused by the victim’s negligence, and that the Defendant did not commit any negligence.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court, the accused is the first head of the post.