특수공무집행방해치상등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.
Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for three years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
(a) The offense of violation of the Road Traffic Act under Article 151 of the Public Prosecutor Act shall not be prosecuted against the victim’s express wish under the main sentence of Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, and where the victim expresses his wish not to punish or withdraws his/her wish to punish, the court shall, pursuant to subparagraph 6 of Article 327 of the Criminal Procedure Act, adjudicate the dismissal of prosecution as a judgment
Although the victim submitted to the court a document that does not want punishment for the defendant on October 21, 2019 after the prosecution of this case was instituted, it is unreasonable that the court below did not render a judgment dismissing the prosecution of this part of the facts charged.
B. The sentence of the lower court (two years of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, etc.) is too heavy.
2. Judgment on the prosecutor's grounds for appeal
A. The summary of this part of the facts charged is a person who is engaged in driving a car BVS car.
At around 01:00 on July 3, 2019, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.129% 0.129%, and the Defendant was driving the said car on the one-lane road in Seosan-si, Seosan-si, thereby driving the said car in the direction of sports complex in the area of D apartment room.
At the time, since it was night and there was a kacker section, there was a duty of care to prevent accidents, such as reducing speed and accurately operating the steering and brake system by properly examining the right and the right and the right of the driver of the motor vehicle.
Nevertheless, under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant shocked a fluoral stone installed on the right side of the road as it is by negligence while neglecting it, and caused the Defendant to lose the center of the vehicle due to its shock and leave the left side of the road, and thereby, the part of the first floor outer wall of the FSM6 vehicle and the building owned by the victim E, Seosan-si C and the building of the second floor owned by the same victim.