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

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in the operation of Cone Star Co., Ltd.

On November 6, 2017, the Defendant driven the above 04:20 on the 04:20 on the 196th day, and had the front road of the gold apartment, which was located in the 527-1st day of the remaining female, proceeded from the funeral funeral room to the new elementary school room in the new month.

At the same time, signal lights and crosswalks are installed on the front door of the entrance, so in such cases, the person engaged in driving service had a duty of care to safely proceed in accordance with traffic signals by making it possible for the person to walk on the front door crosswalk.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not find out the victim D(n, 68 years old) who was fright from the left side of the course due to the occupational negligence of driving the said van, which was driven by the Defendant without looking well at the front side in contravention of the red stop signal, and did not discover the victim D(n, 68 years old) who was driven by the Defendant, and had the victim go beyond the victim's right side part and face part on the road surface with the front part of the above van driven by the Defendant.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim due to the above occupational negligence, i.e., the part where the body part of the body body part of the body part of the 14 weeks, which requires approximately 14 weeks medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. A survey report on actual condition and an accident scene photograph;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the injury diagnosis certificate;

1. Article 3 (1), the proviso to Article 3 (2) 1 and 6 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, and Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence is a violation of the suspension signal by the defendant, and the victim was injured by violating the duty of pedestrian protection in the crosswalk, and the victim was injured. The degree of the violation of the duty of care by the defendant is not easy, but the degree of injury by the victim is the degree of the victim.