Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for one year.

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

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a B knife vehicle.

On January 26, 2019, the Defendant, around 14:40, driven five lanes prior to the Soyang-gu Seoul Metropolitan Area C from D to the three-lanes, depending on the three-lanes.

Since there is a place where a signal, etc. has been installed, in such a case, there was a duty of care to reduce the speed to the person engaged in driving service and drive safely in accordance with the good faith while living well before and after the end.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and neglected to use it as a yellow signal and received the part of the driver’s seat of the Fpoter Cargo Driving from the right-hand side of the above Kanik Tack to the left-hand side, which was driven by the victim E (58 years old).

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the death of the above E by occupational negligence and at the same time caused the injury to the victim G (the aged 61) who was on the top of the above Poter cargo vehicle to suffer approximately 32 weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The actual survey report and the accident site photograph;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to death certificates and diagnosis certificates;

1. Article 3 (1) of the relevant Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, Article 3 (1), the proviso to (2) 1 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of alternative imprisonment without prison labor;

1. The reason for the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Code Article 62(1) has resulted in the death of the victim E due to the instant accident, and the degree of injury to the victim G is very significant.

On the other hand, the defendant recognized the crime of this case and opposed to his mistake, and the bereaved family members E and the victim G by mutual consent with both the bereaved family members and the victim G.