[Defendant-Appellant]

The Defendant is a person engaging in driving cars.

On October 20, 2017, the Defendant driven the above car at around 53:53, and led the Defendant to drive a bend one-lane to the right-hand side of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, in the direction of ○○○ 10,000, at the direction of the blue-ri market.

At the time, the Defendant was close on the ground of defluence in the preceding day and was in the middle of the yellow-ray located therein.

Inasmuch as a road was bended to the right side where an Angra-ray is installed, a driver of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to safely drive the motor vehicle in such a condition that the driver would stop the motor vehicle on the side and lock the motor vehicle, and would be able to properly manipulate the steering gear and brakes following the motor vehicle, so that the driver could safely drive the motor vehicle and prevent the accident from occurring.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and failed to properly operate the steering gear on the right bend by driving it, and caused the Defendant to go beyond India, by overcoming the center line as it is, the Defendant’s safety gate for pedestrians in India and getting the victim’s ○○○ and the victim’s △△△△△△△ to drive the Defendant.

Ultimately, around October 20, 2017: around 20: around 20, the Defendant had the victim ○○○○○○○○○○○○○ (hereinafter “○○○○”) caused the death of the victim, such as brain training, etc., during the process of being transferred to the Hanyang University Hospital, on October 21, 2017: around 09:16, the Defendant had the victim △△△△△△△ Hospital located in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, and caused the death of the victim ○○○○○ (hereinafter “the victim”).

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police officer about △△△△;

1. The actual condition of traffic accidents;

1. A written investigation report on the body of △△△△;

1. A written diagnosis of death to ○○○;

1. Blue CCTV CD images;

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act

1. Commercial concurrence and the selection of a punishment;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act; Selection of imprisonment without prison labor

Article 45 of the Road Traffic Act provides that no driver shall drive a motor vehicle, etc. in a state where the driver is likely to drive the motor vehicle normally due to the influence of overwork, etc. and other reasons. However, the defendant is unable to drive a motor vehicle, and the defendant has been driving the motor vehicle. Nevertheless, the defendant, while driving the motor vehicle, has caused the instant accident by drilling and reporting the steel materials over the center line of the road, which are set up in the width. The two victims, who were sitting on the sidewalk, were suffering from a serious consequence of the defendant's wrong death. Although the defendant divided his/her misconduct, the victim's efforts seem to fall short of driving the motor vehicle, such as the victim's bereaved family members' mind. Rather, the victim's bereaved family members, who were the victims, have taken account of the victim's severe punishment, such as the defendant's imprisonment with labor or imprisonment without labor for a long period exceeding 1 year, and the victim's comprehensive sentencing guidelines for the punishment of traffic damage, such as imprisonment without labor, has not been set for more than 3 years.