However, 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 the duty of driving a rocketing taxi belonging to B Co., Ltd.

On April 2, 2018, the Defendant driving the above taxi around 07:20 on April 2, 2018, and proceeding the front road of the D apartment commercial building in the south-gu Seoul Metropolitan City in the direction of wind from the direction of the south-west distance.

On the contrary, the opposition has been made.

Since there is a place where the center line of yellow solid lines is installed, there was a duty of care to make a person engaged in driving service, not a central line, but a duty of care to intern at the permissible point of internship.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and got the victim E (Nam, 78 years old) who was walking a road on the opposite part of the Madern due to the negligent negligence of the central line, to go beyond the front part of the taxi driving by the Defendant.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury, such as double duplicating the body of the victims, which requires approximately 12 weeks of medical treatment, due to such occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. E statements;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Application of accident scene and vehicle photographs-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 3 (1) and the proviso to Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Special Cases concerning the Selection of Punishment for Criminal Facts, Article 268 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Where there is a substantial negligence in the occurrence of a traffic accident or the expansion of damage even for the victim, in the area to reduce the reduction (one month to eight months) of the category of general traffic accident (the scope of recommendation) according to the sentencing guidelines, the illegality in the case of a non-prosecution of punishment (including a person under special circumstances) under Article 3 (2) (proviso) (excluding subparagraph 8) of the School Special Act, or in the case of a climatic driving;

2. Determination of sentence: Consideration, such as the fact that the injured party has suffered serious injury, the fact that the injured party has agreed smoothly with the injured party, and the fact that the injured party has been negligent by using the road;