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

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On May 28, 2013, at around 15:47, the Defendant driven the freight truck of B, and proceeded in front of the Agricultural Cooperative located in Gwangju City, according to one-lane of the police box at the Myeon of the previous public parking lot.

Since the place is milch after the passage of rain and both roads where bus stops and taxi stops are located on each side of the roads, the driver of the motor vehicle has a duty of care to check whether or not there is a person driving the motor vehicle, and to check whether or not there is a person driving the motor vehicle, and to prevent accidents in advance by driving the motor vehicle safely according to the traffic condition.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected his duty and found the victim C (the 84 years old) who crosss to the right side of the left side of the running direction due to negligence on the part of the Defendant’s failure to perform his duty on the front side, and received the victim as the front part of the above cargo vehicle operated by the Defendant.

Ultimately, at around 07:15 on June 3, 2013, the Defendant caused the victim's death by occupational negligence by shocking at the D Hospital located in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

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

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a death certificate;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents According to the Selection of Punishment, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and selection of

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act regarding community service order was that the victim died.

Although the victim was undeveloped and damped on the road, the accident time was low, and the accident place was a place with frequent passage of people.

However, the defendant is the first offender and agreed with the victim's bereaved family.

In consideration of all these points, the same type as the order shall be determined.