1. Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for ten months;

However, the above sentence against Defendant A for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant B is a person who is engaged in driving a motor vehicle E in driving a motor vehicle.

On September 8, 2015, the Defendant driven the said car at around 06:45, and driven the two-lanes of the two-lanes in front of the So-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, the two-lanes of the two-lanes in front of the So-gu Park.

At the time, the passage of the front door was not well secured due to the sunlight of the front door, so in such a case, the driver has a duty of care to safely drive the front door and prevent the accident in advance.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and caused the victim F (53 years old) who crosses the road to the right side by his negligence on the left side of the vehicle to go beyond the ground.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the victim to go beyond the road due to the above occupational negligence, thereby causing the death of the victim due to the diversity damage.

2. Defendant A is a person who is engaged in driving a G Poter freight vehicle.

On September 8, 2015, the Defendant driven the above cargo vehicle around 06:48, and proceeded with the two-lanes of the 246-lanes in front of the Solar Park, So-gu, So-called So-called, So-called, Nowon-gu, Seoul.

At the time, the passage of the front door was not well secured due to the sunlight of the front door, so in such a case, the driver has a duty of care to safely drive the front door and prevent the accident in advance.

Nevertheless, the Defendant failed to discover the victim F(F, 53 years old) and the victim H(35 years old) who was under relief measures due to traffic accidents due to the negligence of driving the vehicle by neglecting it, and received the above cargo lanes.

As a result, the Defendant caused the above F by occupational negligence to the diversified damage, and each of the above H caused the death of each of the above H due to the damage to the pleastal plea.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ 1.