Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10 million.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of private taxi B.

On July 19, 2019, the Defendant driven the above car on July 19, 2019, and continued the crosswalk in front of the (Gu) Da located in Busan Shipping Daegu metropolitan City (Gu) to the middle-dong and underground-road outflow.

At the time, the boomed boom, and the cream was not revealed immediately after sunrise, so there was a duty of care to reduce the speed and to drive safely by checking well the right and the right and the right of the road.

Nevertheless, while proceeding about 50km/h of the highest speed exceeding 48km, the Defendant neglected the duty of care in the front direction, and neglected to take the victim F (n, 20 years of age) who was placed on the crosswalk, the Defendant got the victim F (n, 20 years of age) as a taxi driving.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the victim to die due to the high level of double damage by the above negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to G, H and I;

1. Submissions to the results of the traffic accident report, black stuff images, field photographs, CCTV images for crime prevention, investigation reports (on-site photographs), and traffic accident investigation and analysis;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on a written autopsy;

1. Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Special Cases concerning the Selection of Punishment, Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the selection of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that there is a high possibility of criticism against the defendant in that the defendant's negligence on the grounds of sentencing of the provisional payment order results in the death of the victim.

On the other hand, it was relatively difficult for the drunk victim to walk up the crosswalks immediately after the sunrise, and the victim under the influence of alcohol was to walk up the crosswalks as they were, at the vehicle driving signal, the defendant was proceeding in excess of the speed of 50 km per hour, and the victim's bereaved family members and the victim's family members were to reach a smooth agreement.