특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.
However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Error of facts and misapprehension of legal principles did not flickering the date, time, direction direction, etc. as stated in the facts charged, but instead, the direct cause of the instant traffic accident is due to the victim's failure to perform his duty of care in front of the week and excessive manipulation by hand, and there is no proximate causal relation between the Defendant's change of course and the instant traffic accident.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the road where the instant traffic accident occurred (hereinafter “the instant road”) is a secondary lane of 80km speed, and the Defendant entered the two-lanes of the instant road without using direction direction, etc. in order to overtake the instant two-lanes while driving the two-lanes of the road, and a part of the body entered the two-lanes of the instant road and walk the vehicle in the front line. The victim shocked the centralized separation zone to the left side in order to avoid the Defendant’s car coming into the first lane of the instant road while driving the first lane, and the victim reconciled the instant road to the right side of the instant road again.
As such, if the victim moves hand to the left side in order to avoid a conflict with the Defendant’s car that enters a lane without turning on the direction direction direction, etc. while driving on the road of this case, and the centralized separation zone comes to conflict, the victim of the snow company took the hand to the left side somewhat excessively excessive.
It is reasonable to view that there is a proximate causal relationship between the defendant's change of lanes and the traffic accident in this case even if there was a space where the victim's car can pass through the victim's car between the defendant's car and the central separation zone.