The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The summary of the facts charged is the person who is engaged in driving service of the Category D fishery bus (34 passengers) owned by C (State).

Around 05:00 on January 23, 2013, the Defendant driven the above bus and proceeded at a speed of about 69 km from the direction of the development village to the new salary distance of about 69 km from the direction of the development village.

There is a possibility that the operation performance may be reduced due to the phenomenon where the main target device (one put put in place, put in place, or stop by manual pedal) is continuously used in the state where the auxiliary operation device is not used (one put in place, put in place by manual pedal, or the speed and stop by manual pedal) continuously in the state where the auxiliary operation device is not used (one put in place, put in place by manual pedal, or used by engine pedal) during the driving of such a long-term route (one or two parts). In such a case, the Defendant who is engaged in driving a motor vehicle has the duty of care to reduce the speed in advance and maintain the low-speed situation (one or two parts) or drive the auxiliary operation device by using engines.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and was negligent in using an engine engine engine engine engine engine engine without using the engine engine engine engine engine engine engine engine engine without using the engine engine engine engine engine engine engine engine, and due to the negligence that did not reduce the speed of the engine engine engine engine operation, the bus was placed on the road bend and down to the right side due to the decline of the operation performance of the bus, and received a wall beyond the central line.

Ultimately, the Defendant had a victim E (V, 61) who was on board the bus due to the above occupational negligence.