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 duty of driving B car trucks.

On March 23, 2013, the Defendant driven the above truck on March 23, 2013, and led to the driving of the road to the Han Jin-kin-kin distance from the side of the modern steel industry.

In such cases, there was a duty of care to see front and rear left and accurately operate devices including the steering direction and brake system of the vehicle, and not drive the vehicle at a speed or in a manner that may cause danger and obstacle to others according to the traffic situation of the road and the structure and performance of the vehicle.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and got the victim C (V, 46 years old) who crossed the road at the front door of the night room by negligence, and received the Defendant’s front part of the truck.

Accordingly, the Defendant caused the death of the victim by occupational negligence, such as a multi-life, long-term war, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of each police statement of D and E;

1. A traffic accident report, traffic accident report (1), (2), and evidence and photograph of the traffic accident;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on a written autopsy;

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, and Article 268 of the Criminal Act.

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., reasons for sentencing) [the scope of sentencing] of imprisonment without prison labor for not more than five years [the determination of a sentence] traffic crimes, general traffic accidents, and Type 2 (Death of Traffic Accidents): Reduction element: If the victim was at considerable fault in the occurrence of traffic accidents even if the victim was at night (it is deemed that there was a circumstance that it is difficult for the victim to easily expect the victim to cross the road without permission on a six-lane road which has no street, etc. at night and has a centralized separation cost, and it is difficult for the victim to easily expect the victim to cross the road without permission on a one-lane case). There is no aggravated element.