특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(위험운전치상)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor in the instant case, it is sufficient to establish a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (not after the accident) against the defendant.
However, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged by making a wrong judgment on whether the traffic danger and obstacle occurred, whether the Defendant took necessary measures immediately after the occurrence of the traffic accident, etc.
The court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (seven months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, two years of probation observation, two years of community service, 160 hours of social service, 24 hours of lecture to comply with the law, and 40 hours of alcohol treatment lectures) is too uneasible and unfair.
2. Determination
A. On June 26, 2016, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol content of 0.161% in blood transfusion around 18:23 on June 26, 2016, was driving CK5 automobiles and proceeded with three-lane roads in front of the new apartment located in the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu with three-lanes in front of the new apartment.
At the time, the previous vehicle was changed from the two lanes near the defendant's moving direction to the first lane, so in such a case, there was a duty of care to prevent the accident by accurately manipulating the steering system and the brake system in the manner that the driver of the vehicle well sees the right and the right before and after, and after, the driver of the vehicle.
Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and proceeded with the Defendant’s negligence, which led to the change of the fleet from the two lanes above the same direction of the Defendant, to the one-lane, and the part before the driver’s seat and even door of the I Poter in front of the driver’s seat of the Defendant’s vehicle was shocked by the head side of the Defendant’s driver’s vehicle.
Ultimately, the Defendant’s negligence in the above-mentioned occupational negligence about KRW 619,678 of the repair cost.