In this case, the defendant engaged in driving service has a duty of care to thoroughly prevent the accident from occurring.

Nevertheless, when the defendant neglected to go on the front side of the vehicle driving by the defendant, the victim H (the age of 43) who walked on the road from the right side of the direction of the defendant's running on the sidewalk when the defendant neglected to go on the front side of the road, and the above victim was placed on the road, and the victim was placed on the right side of the above vehicle.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the death of the above victim by occupational negligence as above.

2. The driver of a motor vehicle shall not be deemed to have a duty of care to anticipate and prepare for an occurrence of an exceptional situation which is difficult to anticipate, by performing his/her duty of care to the extent that he/she could avoid the result of the occurrence of an ordinary predicted situation;

(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the following facts can be acknowledged: (a) according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, each statement by the witness I, each statement by the police, and the results of the verification in this court on CCTV video recording the situation at the time of the accident, etc., it can only be acknowledged that H, who is used toward the side of the above bus, enters the Defendant’s normally going from the front side of the three-lane road at the time of the accident to the front side of the bus; and (b) it can only be compared to the fact that H, who is used toward the side of the said bus, went into the front side of the bus and died; and (c) furthermore, at the time of the accident in this case, H, who enters the vehicular road at the time of the accident to enter the front side of the said bus; and (d) furthermore, it can be compared to the fact that H, who is expected in advance, to enter the vehicular road