On December 25, 2016, the Defendant driven the above bus on December 17:26, 2016, and driven the front road of Daegu Dong-gu E at a speed of 54.4 km each hour from the side of the village amusement park to the direction of the Asian at a speed of 54.4 km each hour.

Since there are two-lanes in which the passage of vehicles is frequent, the driver of the vehicle has a duty of care to live well on the front side and the left side, and to accurately manipulate the steering and brakes so as to prevent the accident from occurring.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and proceeded on the right side of the road and received the left side part of the victim FF (74 tax) crossing the crosswalk from the right side of the road to the left side of the road as the front part of the city bus driving by the defendant.

Ultimately, on January 12, 2017, at the H hospital located in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, Seoul-gu around 03:56, the Defendant caused the death of the above victim due to cerebral blood by occupational negligence.

The driver of a motor vehicle cannot be obliged to perform his/her duty of care to anticipate and prepare for the occurrence of an exceptional situation that is sufficiently satisfied and unforeseeable in preparation for an ordinary predicted situation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 87Do1332, Sept. 8, 1987; 92Do2077, Feb. 23, 1993; 2010Do4078, Jul. 29, 2010). Meanwhile, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial must be based on evidence with probative value that leads to the conviction of a judge to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Thus, unless there is such evidence, the defendant's interest is doubtful.