Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for eight months.

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.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of the E-Spo-type vehicle.

On September 2, 2017, around 05:30 on the 05:30 on the 2nd west-gu, Seogu, Daegu, and the twond west-gu also proceeded ahead of the two parallel west-gu to the four-distance radius of the two parks.

Since it is an intersection with a crosswalk and a road with a speed of 60 km per hour, there was a duty of care to safely drive a person engaged in driving service by maintaining the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right are well and observing the speed limit.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and did not properly examine the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the victim F, who crosses the above intersection without permission by negligence exceeding the speed of the restriction, conflict with the front part of the motor vehicle in front of the Defendant’s operation.

Ultimately, at around 05:59 on September 2, 2017, the Defendant caused the death of the victim at Daegu Tol University Hospital, which was located at the 17-lane Nam-gu, Daegu 2nd Park on September 2, 2017 due to the occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A report on the occurrence of a traffic accident and a report on actual condition investigation;

1. An autopsy report and a corpse inspection report;

1. Application of the statutes of the Road Traffic Authority;

1. Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and the selection of imprisonment without prison labor for a crime;

1. The sentencing of Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence under the Criminal Act results in the serious consequence that the crime of this case was committed on the grounds of the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act. On the other hand, the confession of the defendant and reflects against the defendant, the occurrence of an accident is responsible for the victim who illegally crossed the road on the new wall, the defendant has agreed with the bereaved family of the victim, and the marine vehicle is covered by a comprehensive insurance, the defendant is the primary offender, the defendant's age, sex, sex, environment, motive, circumstance, means and consequence of the crime, and all other circumstances constituting the conditions for the sentencing specified in the arguments of this case, including the circumstances after the crime