교통사고처리특례법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for one year.
Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The sentence of the lower court (one year and six months) is too unreasonable.
B. The Prosecutor’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. The instant crime committed by the Defendant does not require children, including the victim on board the said knex vehicle, to fasten the seat belt while driving the said knex vehicle for the children accompanying the Taekwondo ground, and by negligence departing from the back of the driver’s seat without unstamping the rear of the knex, causing the victim’s death by falling off the road while leaving the back of the back of the knex, and causing the head to fall off on the road, and resulting in the victim’s death. In light of the circumstances, method and details of the instant crime, and the consequences of the accident, the crime is not good; the Defendant immediately reported the 119th without moving the victim to the hospital; and the victim’s bereaved family members do not agree with the victim’s bereaved family members to the point of leaving the back of the knex vehicle; and the victim’s bereaved family members who want to be punished against the Defendant is disadvantageous to the Defendant.
It can be justified that the defendant has committed a crime, and that the defendant did not take appropriate and prompt measures after the accident, and that the victim's bereaved family member suffers a big loss. However, the defendant also failed to make a decision on the appropriate relief measures necessary for the victim at the time of the accident due to a large shock, the method of the measures necessary for the victim at the time of the accident, and the post-determination thereof, and it seems that the defendant did not act in order to conceal the accident or reduce his responsibility. The vehicle operated by the defendant was covered by the motor vehicle comprehensive insurance, and the defendant deposited 30 million won for the victim's bereaved family at the court below.