교통사고처리특례법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for ten months.
Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal asserts that the punishment imposed by the court below (10 months) is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that the punishment imposed by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.
2. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing between the two parties of the judgment, the crime of this case is an unfavorable circumstance to the defendant, on the following grounds: (a) by negligence by the defendant driving a truck on the sidewalk, the defendant caused the victim F, E, and G to die; (b) the victim F, and E caused the injury requiring medical treatment for about 12 weeks to the victim G; (c) the crime is considerably good and the damage result is very serious; (d) the defendant did not agree with the victim E’s bereaved family members and the victim G until the trial; and (e) the victim E’s bereaved family members want to punish the defendant with severe punishment against the defendant.
However, at the time of this case, the main cause of the accident of this case is judged to be the failure to operate properly due to the excessive heat of the defendant's driving truck at the time of this case, the defendant obtained a loan from his own house and land as security, and agreed to pay 30 million won to the bereaved family members of the victim F. The court below deposited 15 million won for the victim E's bereaved family members, 20 million won for the victim G, and deposited 15 million won for the victim E's bereaved family members in the trial, additionally deposited 15 million won for the victim E's bereaved family in the trial, the defendant's driving truck is subscribed to the Samsung Fire Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., and the defendant's driving truck is currently covered by the victim E's comprehensive automobile insurance company and the victim G are currently claiming damages against the above insurance company, and therefore, it is anticipated that the restoration of damage through payment of insurance money will be made in the future, whether the defendant supports the mother suffering from dementia, and there is no favorable crime and any other crime against the defendant after February 1982.