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 engaged in driving five tons of truck B.

On November 11, 2013, at around 05:15, the Defendant driven the above truck and proceeded the two-lane road of the Seogdong-distance in the Dongdong-dong, Seosan-si, Seosan-si, with one-lane distance from the west-si off of the Seosan Terminal at the speed of about 50km each hour according to one-lane.

Since there is an intersection where a signal is installed, there was a duty of care for a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle to drive the motor vehicle safely in accordance with the signals by checking well the right and right of the front and right of the motor vehicle.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected and proceeded with the vehicle stop signal while neglecting and neglecting it, and received the part of the victim C(69 years old) driving in front of the instant truck from the right side of the Defendant to the left side of the vehicle driving signal.

As a result, the Defendant suffered from the above occupational negligence to the above C the injury, including cage cages that require approximately five weeks of medical treatment, and to the victim E (the victim 39 years of age) who is the passenger of the damaged vehicle for about eight weeks of medical treatment, such as the skin and the loss of organization, respectively.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. E statements;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. Each written diagnosis;

1. Request for appraisal, report on investigation (the result of the restoration of black stay images);

1. Application of the statutes governing traffic accident-related photographs;

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

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. The fact that the defendant under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act reflects his mistake in depth, that the defendant has no particular criminal record except for the previous offense of a fine twice or more, that the vehicle driven by the defendant was covered by the comprehensive motor vehicle insurance, and that the defendant has the occupation, age, etc. of the defendant.