교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)
1. The guilty part of the judgment of the court below is reversed.
Of the facts charged in the instant case, the victim J.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. As to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Bodily Injury) against the victim B among the facts charged in this case concerning the acquittal portion, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the victim of this part of the facts charged on a different premise is erroneous by misunderstanding the remaining facts which failed to exhaust all necessary deliberations, and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment, if comprehensively taking account of the victim's statement, injury diagnosis statement, etc. that the form of the accident and mental impulse of the accident occurred.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment without prison labor and two years of suspended execution) is deemed to be unfair as having been determined by the judgment of conviction among the aforementioned convictions not guilty of a considerable part of the facts charged.
2. Determination
A. 1) Judgment of the misunderstanding of facts as to the part not guilty 1) The prosecutor is responsible for proving a false criminal facts charged, and the recognition of criminal facts should be based on evidence with probative value to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such proof, even if there is doubt as to the defendant's guilt, it shall be judged as the defendant's interest (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do4737, Feb. 24, 2006). 2) On the basis of the above legal principles, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that the evidence submitted by the victim B's investigation agency and the court below, such as each statement and injury diagnosis, submitted by the prosecutor, are insufficient to conclude that the victim suffered injury due to the accident in this case. In light of the above judgment of the court below, the judgment of the court below is justified and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of facts as alleged by the prosecutor.
(b) conviction;