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

The defendant is a person engaged in driving a motor vehicle B with sod vehicle.

On October 22, 2017, the Defendant driven the above vehicle at a speed of about 75.4 km in the speed of 75.4 km in accordance with the three-lanes of speed from the air room of the present high school to the air room of the air conditioners at the speed of 29 ambari-ro.

At night, as the defendant engaged in driving of a motor vehicle is at night, he/she has a duty of care to prevent the accident in advance by complying with the speed of 50 km, the speed limit of the above shooting distance, seeing the right and the right and the right and the right, and driving safely.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and followed up the victim C’s body crossing the road to the right side from the left side of the mast vehicle on the left side of the mast vehicle to the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle at a speed of about 75.4 km per hour exceeding 25.4 km per hour from the speed limit.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the victim to die by such occupational negligence on October 22, 2017, around 16:41, and around 774, Nam-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City, Nam-gu, Incheon, to the death of the victim at the 21st Gacheon-dong, Nam-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to D or E;

1. A survey report on actual conditions;

1. A death certificate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the written request for appraisal;

1. Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts (Selection of Imprisonment without prison labor);

1. It is so ordered as per Disposition under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the grounds that there is no previous conviction other than a fine imposed on the defendant due to drinking alcohol driving in 2016, the victim's unauthorized crossing of the case except the defendant's negligence is an important cause of the accident of this case, the victim's heir was not finally determined by filing a lawsuit seeking nullity of marriage against the wife of the victim, and the defendant did not attempt to reach an agreement. The vehicle of this case is covered by a comprehensive insurance.