특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. In light of the gist of the grounds of appeal: (a) the confession and reflect of the defendant; (b) there is considerable negligence in the occurrence of the instant traffic accident to the victim D (hereinafter “victim”); (c) the defendant subscribed to a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance; (d) the defendant's bereaved family members do not want the punishment of the defendant; (b) the defendant's bereaved family members do not want to be punished; (c) the defendant was the first offender with no criminal power; (d) the defendant was living together with the defendant; (c) the defendant was living together with the defendant; (d) the defendant died of all of his parents around the third and fourth years of elementary school; and (e) the defendant sent a prone period of time due to the death of all of his parents around the fourth and fourth years of elementary school, the punishment imposed by the court below is unreasonable.
2. Taking into account the circumstances alleged by the Defendant, each of the crimes of this case also requires a strict punishment in accordance with the purpose of the amended Road Traffic Act, which is a crime that may threaten another person’s life and body as well as driving under the influence of alcohol and leads to the death of the victim and the victim by occupational negligence who neglected his/her duty of care while driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.104%, resulting in the death of the victim through brain livering expenses, etc., and does not take necessary measures, such as providing relief to the victim by immediately stopping after destroying the victim’s handculs. In addition, it is necessary for the Defendant to strictly punish the case, in accordance with the purpose of the amended Road Traffic Act, as a crime that may threaten another person’s life and body as well as driving under the influence of alcohol, causing the death of the victim while driving under the influence of alcohol, and the quality of the crime is not very good. The Defendant is grossly negligent in driving a motor vehicle after measuring the traffic accident.