교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 9,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (in fact-finding and misunderstanding of legal principles) is that the instant crime was committed in the course of operating a commercial building and a road adjacent to a residential area, which is considerably narrow at night, and the Defendant has a duty of care to operate a vehicle by acceleratinging the speed above the maximum speed, by sufficiently predicting that the occurrence of a sudden situation is high, and by properly performing such duty of care, there is sufficient possibility to prevent accidents. Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles, even if the Defendant’s negligence was recognized as an occupational negligence.
2. Summary of the facts charged and the judgment of the court below
A. The summary of the facts charged is a person engaging in driving a BMW car.
On October 27, 2017, at around 02:39, the Defendant driven the said car, and operated the three-lane road above the new Tridong-dong in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-do at the speed of about 61km from the Dagdong-do to the east-do.
At the time of night, there was a duty of care to reduce speed as a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle and to properly manipulate the front door and the right and the right and the right of the motor vehicle and to prevent accidents by accurately manipulating the steering direction and the brake system.
Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and proceeded on the road by occupational negligence, which is proceeding without living well, and the Defendant did not discover the victim C (ma, 21 years old) who was used on the road after the collision with the central separation zone on the road, and did not discover the victim D (ma, 21 years old) and the passenger D (ma, 21 years old) who was driven by the Defendant, and served as the wheels of the car driven by the Defendant.
(hereinafter “instant accident.” Ultimately, the Defendant caused the victim C to die at the site due to the high level of double damage due to such occupational negligence, and caused damage to the victim D in whole and in part due to the entire flaging of a plant and the flaging of a plant.