However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of a C Poter cargo vehicle.

On September 13, 2015, the Defendant driven the above cargo truck on around 17:50, and proceeded at about 110km in speed, depending on one lane from the offside to the offside of the volcanic basin in front of the D apartment in Jung-gu, Seoul.

At that time, the speed limit is 60 km per hour, so in such a case, a person engaged in driving a motor vehicle has a duty of care to observe the speed limit and to safely drive the motor vehicle by checking it well.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and neglected to proceed with the speed exceeding the limit and received the error of driving the victim E (16 tax) moving right from the right side of the way to the right side as the front part of the said cargo.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the death of the victim due to the above occupational negligence from the Seoul Medical Center on September 15, 2015 during the after-delivery treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A traffic accident report (1) (2) (2)

1. Investigation report (as to the time of appraising the speed of the cargo vehicle):

1. A comprehensive analysis of traffic accidents;

1. A death diagnosis report or postmortem report;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing the scene of traffic accidents;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents Aggravated Punishment, and Article 268 of the Criminal Act;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Within the scope of the recommended punishment, traffic accidents resulting in general traffic accidents (from April to October) in the mitigated area (including serious efforts to recover damage).

2. Determination of sentence resulted in a serious result of the death of the victim.

In addition, one defendant has the same criminal history.

However, the fact that the defendant recognized his mistake and against himself, the above vehicle of the defendant was covered by a comprehensive insurance, and the defendant agreed with the bereaved family members of the victim and the victim is the defendant.