교통사고처리특례법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal in this case is that the crosswalk is installed towards the direction of the running of the Defendant’s driver’s vehicle, and the delivery to the right side is likely to enter the road. The Defendant was driving on the two-lanes of the two-lane, a two-lane, a two-lane, and thus, the Defendant neglected the duty of care to see the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and right
In addition, since the accident was damped on the road at the time of the accident, the defendant was negligent in proceeding at a speed of 75 km per hour exceeding 60 km per hour, which is a restricted speed, even though he/she had the duty of care to prevent the accident by driving at a speed reduced, and the location of the accident at issue was difficult.
Even if the light of the automobile hedging could have sufficiently examined the front left, so it cannot be deemed that the defendant was unable to find the victim due to the operation of the vehicle.
Nevertheless, the court below rendered a judgment of innocence on the ground that it was difficult to predict the victim's unauthorized crossing without permission, and it is insufficient to recognize that the defendant was negligent in neglecting the duty of care for the pre-determination. Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misunderstanding
2. The facts charged and the judgment of the court below
A. The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a Crocketing taxi.
The Defendant, around 02:00 on August 10, 201, driving the above taxi along the south cycle of the 124 Li-dong, Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and driving the above taxi at about 75 km in speed from the Gu-ro to Siri-IC along the two-lanes of the 3-lane road from the Gu-ro to Siri-IC, while at the time, the view of the city at night is set at night, and there is a little rain. Therefore, the Defendant has a duty of care to reduce the speed and drive the vehicle on the right and the right and the right and the right and right and duty of operation.