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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a marina freight vehicle B.

On May 28, 2013, the Defendant driven the above cargo vehicle around 14:10, and led to two-lanes of the two-lanes of the valley in the middle corner of the eropic road, which is located in the hot spring dong-gu, Busan, to the intersection of the U.S. from the 1st century to the intersection of the U.S., at a speed of about 50km/h in speed.

At the time, the surface was slicked and there was a center line with a bend road, so the driver of the vehicle had a duty of care to safely drive the steering system and brakes by reducing speed and accurately manipulating the steering system.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to stop on the road which was driven by negligence while driving on the road where the center line was obstructed, and the Defendant shocked the front part of the D Poter Cargo Vehicle driven by the victim C(54 years old) who was driving on the road where the center line was obstructed by the Defendant, and shocked the F Maz Vehicle driven by the victim E(33 years old) who continued to drive the said D Poter Cargo Vehicle.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered, from the above occupational negligence, approximately 6 weeks of the victim C with dynasium such as dynasium, etc., which includes approximately 6 weeks of closed crynasium, and the victim G (the 51 years of age) who is the partner of the cargo of the said dynasium, about 12 weeks of the closed dynasium, and approximately 4 weeks of the dynasium and dynasium for the victim E in need of approximately 4 weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each written statement of E, C and G;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each written diagnosis;

1. Article 3 (1) and the proviso to Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, the proviso to Article 3 (2) of the same Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes Act are with heavy emphasis on the extent of damage caused by the sentencing, and are not agreed with the victims, and the motive, background, and means of the instant crime.