교통사고처리특례법위반(치사)
Defendant
A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 3,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.
except that this shall not apply.
Punishment of the crime
1. Defendant A is a person who is engaged in the duty of driving a Korean-style taxi that is a Korean-style Korean-Korean individual.
On February 25, 2018, the Defendant driven the above taxi at around 23:52, and proceeded with the E convenience store in front of the E convenience store located in Gyeonggi-si, the government of the Gyeonggi-si along the two-lane road in the front side of the Dong-dong.
At the time, the victim F was at night and was going to cross the vehicle without permission from the right side of the defendant's moving direction, so there was a duty of care to safely operate the brake system by properly operating it.
Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and did not discover a victim who is crossing without permission and did not properly operate the brake system, and received the victim as part of the panion in front of the taxi right side of the defendant driving.
As a result, the Defendant had the victim by occupational negligence go beyond the road, and followed by the victim.
B Driving G Jinasi caused the victim to be in excess of the victim, resulting in the victim's death at the site due to external brain damage, etc.
2. Defendant B is a person engaged in the duties of driving a taxi for business use in G beta.
The Defendant was driving the said taxi at the date, time, place, and place indicated in the “1” paragraph, and continued to drive the taxi following A’s taxi listed in the “1” paragraph.
At night, at the time, at the front of the defendant's proceeding, the taxi driver A was parked and stopped in the victim as stated in the "1" paragraph at the front of the defendant's proceeding, and the victim was in a state beyond the road due to the above accident. In such a case, the person engaged in driving a motor vehicle had a duty of care to safely operate the brakes by properly operating the brakes.
Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and neglected to do so, as described in the “1” paragraph.