beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 목포지원 2015.10.19 2015고단680

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등

Text

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.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. The accused is a person engaging in driving service on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Violation of the Road Traffic Act, and violation of the Road Traffic Act;

On April 7, 2013, the defendant driving the above van without obtaining a driver's license on April 19, 2013, and driving it along the three-lane road in front of the D, which is located in G in G, with three-lanes from the 3-lane square to the gate-high school slope.

At night, at the time of the defendant's proceeding, the FCA110 V, driven by the victim E (the age of 49) on the one-lane of the defendant's proceeding, and in such a case, the driver of the motor vehicle had a duty of care to look at the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right of the motor vehicle to prevent the accident in advance.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and got the front front part of the driver’s seat of the above Oral Ba, which was proceeding in one lane due to the negligence of changing the lane rapidly to drive.

As a result, the Defendant suffered from both slots that need to be treated for approximately two weeks by occupational negligence as above, and at the same time escaped without damaging the above Oral Ba in a way that would amount to KRW 1,065,000 for repair costs and without taking necessary measures.

2. On April 19, 2013, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving) and driven Bone Star or Gohap without obtaining a driver’s license at a section of about 3 km from the front of the soft apartment apartment in the so-called Mapo-si Mapo-si to the front of the Mapo-si Mapo-si Mapo-si.

3. While the Defendant was prohibited from operating a motor vehicle on the road, which is not covered by mandatory insurance in violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, the Defendant operated the Bone Star or the passenger car without mandatory insurance as described in paragraph (2).

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's legal statement 1.