beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.08.18 2016노1927

교통사고처리특례법위반등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 1.5 million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal was under the influence of alcohol content of 0.064% in blood at the time of driving.

2. Summary of the facts charged

A. On September 19, 2015, the Defendant: (a) driven D Poter cargo under the influence of alcohol content of 0.064% at a fluence of 0.064%, from the fluence on the side of the river in front of the toilet in the Hancheon-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Pyeongcheon-si, which opened a distance from the fluence of the roads in front of the river market in the Hancheon-si.

B. The Defendant violated the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents is a person who is engaged in driving of a DNA cargo vehicle.

On September 19, 2015, the Defendant, around 14:40 on September 14, 2015, driven a road adjacent to the Gangseo-gu market in the amount of the Gangseo-gu, Ansan-si, and around 0.064% of alcohol content in the blood, by the fluence of the mar-do restaurant from the parallel of the mar-do in the under the influence of alcohol content 0.064%.

A person engaged in driving service has a duty of care to operate safely by accurately operating the brakes, steering devices, and other devices and driving it in the direction of the steering.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, due to negligence that did not see the front door properly, she shocked the part of the victim F(72 tax) who is walking on the same side as the above vehicle on the front part of the vehicle driving by the Defendant, and caused the victim to suffer diversified diagnosis that requires approximately two weeks of medical treatment.

3. The lower court’s determination is difficult to recognize that the Defendant was driven under the influence of alcohol, such as the summary of the facts charged, solely with the witness E’s legal statement, etc.

On the other hand, not guilty of the facts charged for the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and dismissed the prosecution on the facts charged for the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents on the grounds that the above vehicles are covered by comprehensive insurance.

4. The following facts acknowledged by the court of original judgment based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of original judgment and the following circumstances acknowledged therefrom are considered.