Defendant shall be punished by a fine of eight million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the driver of the B treatment 9.5 ton of the beginning of the drama, which is a low-end car truck.

On January 27, 2016, at around 15:40, the Defendant followed the four-lane road in front of the Taedong-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (Seoul Special Metropolitan City), along four-lanes, from the Han-do area to the Han-do area in the Han-do Special Metropolitan City (Seoul Special Metropolitan City), and transferred the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right to the right of the pedestrian. As such, the Defendant had a crosswalk for pedestrians. Although the Defendant had a duty of care to check whether there is a person standing the crosswalk and to safely enter the crosswalk, the Defendant did not properly look at the front bank due to negligence in the course of the business, and caused the death of the victim by pressure of the victim D (78 years) who was standing the crosswalk in accordance with the pedestrian protection of the Defendant, at around 17:24, Seo-gu Special Metropolitan City Special Metropolitan City 95, Seocheon-ro, Daejeon Special Metropolitan City, to the right to the right to the right to the right.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to traffic accident reports (1), (2), accident site photographs, and death diagnosis reports;

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 the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act - The degree of violation of the duty of care is grave because the defendant shocked the victim crossinging the crosswalk pursuant to the pedestrian signals, the occurrence of a serious result of the victim's death due to the accident in this case, the damage victim's actual record of punishment twice as the same crime, and the crime in this case is committed in favor of the defendant - the fact that the defendant is against the defendant, the defendant's bereaved family members want to take the action against the defendant, the vehicle of the defendant is insured with the deduction of cargo, and the defendant is economical.