beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2017.10.16 2017고정393

도로교통법위반

Text

The defendant is innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is a person engaging in driving a BYF small passenger car.

On May 29, 2013, the Defendant driven the above car at around 03:00, and led to the 101 parking lot of the Sungho-ho apartment, which is located in the Gwangjin-si-si-dong, to proceed from the direction of the Gangnam Hospital.

Since there was a car parked as an apartment parking lot, there was a duty of care for a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle to live well on the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and duty of care to drive the motor vehicle safely.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to drive the D M&D car owned by the victim C due to his negligence, followed by the driver’s seat of the victim C, and was in the opposite direction to the front part of the F&D car due to his shock, with the driver’s seat as the front part of the F&D.

E's salary class III 1 ton of 1 ton of the F. They received the part in front of the joint straw.

The Defendant continued to receive the parts of the victim Hh-Wn-Wnn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn

Ultimately, due to the above traffic accidents, the Defendant damaged the above Mt-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-

2. Determination

A. The crime of violating the Road Traffic Act due to the destruction of property by negligence under Article 151 of the Road Traffic Act is established when the driver of a vehicle damages the building or other property of another person due to neglect of care necessary for the performance of his/her duties or gross negligence. Here, “driving” refers to the use of the horse on the road in accordance with its original purpose and use. However, according to Article 2 Subparag. 26 of the Road Traffic Act, Articles 44, 45, 54(1) and 148 and 148-2 of the Road Traffic Act.