Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

However, if the defendant does not pay the above fine, it shall be 100.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person engaging in driving Cunst Motor Vehicle.

On October 29, 2014, at around 18:45, the Defendant driven the said car and proceeded at an insular speed from the 4nd to the 4nd east of the 4nd Ga to the 4nd east of the E-cafeteria located in Daejeon Dong-gu, Daejeon. On October 29, 2014, the Defendant had a duty of care to safely drive the vehicle by checking the front section.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and did not avoid the victim F (the age of 81) who was crossing the right from the left-hand side by negligence and did not go beyond the victim's passenger car in front of the defendant's car.

Ultimately, at around 03:55 on December 29, 2014, the Defendant caused the victim’s death by occupational negligence, from a hospital located in the Dong-gu Daejeon-gu Daejeon, the Defendant caused the death of the victim due to the climatic blood transfusion, the Gu soil, and the smoking.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A traffic accident report (1) and (2) (2)

1. A death certificate;

1. Determination on the Defendant and defense counsel’s assertion

1. Although the Defendant and his defense counsel acknowledged the negligence causing a traffic accident, the causal relationship between the traffic accident and the death of the victim cannot be acknowledged, and the prosecution of this case should be dismissed inasmuch as the Defendant purchased a comprehensive insurance policy.

2. Determination

A. The proximate causal relation can be acknowledged if a traffic accident by occupational negligence is not only the only one which caused the result of the victim's thought, or it is not the direct cause, but also another fact, such as the victim or the third party's negligence, exists between the act and the result.

(See Supreme Court Decision 93Do3612 Decided March 22, 1994; Daejeon District Court Decision 2015No87 Decided July 1, 2015, etc.) (b).

The fact-finding reply letter sent by H Hospital on June 2015, which was sent by the defendant as to whether the defendant was guilty.