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 the business of driving Category C truck.

On May 9, 2016, the Defendant driven the above vehicle around 12:20, and proceeded at a speed of about 79 km in the direction of Austria, along with the three-lane road in front of the Gyeonggi Yang-si in the south-do.

It is a place where the speed of limitation is 30 km every hour in the elderly protection zone, so in this case, the driver of the vehicle has a duty of care to comply with the speed limit, thoroughly drive the vehicle on the front and the safe driving to prevent the accident in advance.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and continued to drive a limited speed exceeding about 49 km, and found it late after the victim E (n, 42 years old) who was moving on the left side from the right side of the defendant's proceeding to the left side in order to go up as a bus stop. However, although the defendant was not faced with, the victim's head part was shocked in front of the right side of the vehicle driving by the defendant.

As a result, the Defendant caused the above victim to die in the workplace due to multiple prolonged damage due to occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A traffic accident report;

1. Comprehensive traffic accident analysis report;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning autopsy reports and postmortem records;

1. Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Selection of alternative imprisonment without prison labor;

1. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act: The occurrence of the serious result of the death of the victim due to the instant traffic accident, the circumstances in which the defendant was running in excess of about 49 km at the time when the accident was committed: The fact that the defendant was divided by mistake, that the defendant agreed with the bereaved family members, that there was no previous criminal record, that the victim was an initial offender without permission, that the victim was at fault.