교통사고처리특례법위반
Defendant
A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 7,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.
The Defendants respectively.
Punishment of the crime
1. Defendant A is a person engaged in driving vehicles of E.
On December 28, 2013, the Defendant driven the above vehicle at around 23:20 on December 28, 2013, and turned down one lane from the three-lanes of the road in front of the 171-1 South-dong, Nam-gu, Incheon, to the speed of 30 to 40 kilometers from the west-do.
At night, since a person engaged in driving duty is at night, he/she had a duty of care to take the front door and left door well, and prevent accidents by accurately keeping the steering direction and brake system.
Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and did so on the left side of the driving direction, thereby violating the pedestrian signal to the right side, and the victim F (the age of 54) was shocked in front of the right side of the Defendant vehicle.
Ultimately, the Defendant caused the death of the victim by his occupational negligence, which was treated by G Hospital around 07:21 on January 1, 2014.
2. Defendant B is a person engaged in driving a H vehicle.
On December 28, 2013, at around 23:20, the Defendant changed the road from 171-1, South-dong, Nam-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City, to west-do, from west-do to west-do, about 60 to 70 kilometers from west-do, the Defendant driven along the two lanes from west-do to west-do.
However, since the above victim was used on the two-lanes, the driver engaged in driving duty has a duty of care to properly see the front door and the right and the right and the right and the right of the driver, and to prevent the accident from occurring.
Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and re-abs the leg part of the victim's bridge which is used due to the preceding accident on the two-lane by the negligence of changing the two-lane to the right side of the vehicle.
Ultimately, the Defendant caused the death of the victim by his occupational negligence prior to the multiple growth donation.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendants’ each.