특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Punishment of the crime
[2012 Highest 3980]
1. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Doing Vehicles) and the Road Traffic Act (Non-accidenting Measures) are those engaged in driving CM7 Motor Vehicles;
At around 20:50 on June 10, 2012, the Defendant stopped the said car on the three-lane of the three-lane of the Korean Scatri-dong, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju, but changed the lane into one-lane.
In this case, the driver of the vehicle has a duty of care to operate direction direction, etc. to give prior notice of change of course, and to change the lane in the future and the future.
Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and neglected to change the lane as it is, and caused the victim to go beyond the road, with the victim D(32 years old) driving, which is proceeding one lane from the middle SPS street to the middle SPS store. It was obvious that the victim could shock the E-mail of the victim D(32 years old).
As a result, the Defendant, by the above occupational negligence, sustained a scambling room and inspection room in need of approximately two weeks of treatment, and at the same time, escaped without immediately stopping the damaged scamba while destroying approximately KRW 369,000 of the repair cost to ensure that the damaged scamba, which was in need of treatment, and without taking measures such as providing relief to the victim.
2. On June 10, 2012, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving) driving at around 20:50, the Defendant, without obtaining a driver’s license, driven the CM7 car at approximately 2 km from the front of the Lone Star in the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju to the roads in front of the Korea Skyke-dong located in the same pair-dong.
3. The Defendant violated the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act operated a CM7 car that was not covered by mandatory insurance at the same date and place as that of paragraph (2).
[2013 Height921] Defendant on February 16, 2013