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

except that 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 C-Ma cargo vehicle.

On October 14, 2012, at around 22:50, the Defendant driven the above cargo vehicle, and led to the two-lane of the two-lanes of the two-lanes of the front 38 national highway in front of the telecom, from the front gate to the front gate. In such a case, the Defendant had a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by accurately manipulating the front gate and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right of the vehicle, and by safely driving the operation of the vehicle.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and found the victim D (the age of 58) who was walking before the defendant's moving direction due to occupational negligence, and operated the hand-on hand on the left side, and operated it rapidly, but did not avoid the victim, and received the victim in front of the right side of the cargo vehicle operated by the defendant.

Ultimately, around October 15, 2012, around 00:35, the Defendant caused the victim to die due to the above occupational negligence by cutting cage at the Damsung E Hospital.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. A death certificate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing evidence and photographs related to each accident;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents Aggravated Punishment, and Article 268 of the Criminal Act;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is a case where the defendant caused a traffic accident while driving on the road and resulting in the death of the victim. However, in light of the result of the crime, the liability for the crime is not minor, but it is against the defendant's recognition of the crime, the defendant's vehicle is covered by a comprehensive insurance, and the defendant's vehicle is deemed to have been compensated for damage, and the defendant's payment of the victim's bereaved family is desired.