특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(위험운전치사상)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.
However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged on a different premise, although it could be recognized that the Defendant had inflicted an injury on the injured person while driving a car in a situation where normal driving is difficult due to influence of drinking, as stated in this part of the facts charged, on a different premise, by misunderstanding the facts, and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two years of probation, protection observation, 120 hours of community service order, and 40 hours of lecture attendance order for compliance driving in October) is excessively unhued and unreasonable.
2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts
A. The summary of this part of the facts charged is a person engaging in driving a CAD car.
On October 30, 2015, the Defendant was driving the said vehicle while driving the vehicle under the influence of alcohol 0.176% while under the influence of alcohol at around 01:00 on the southnam-si of Gyeonggi-do.
At this time, it is the front road of the entrance of apartment house and at night, so in such a case, the driver of the vehicle shall not drive the vehicle in a situation where normal driving is difficult due to influence of drinking, and there was a duty of care to make sure of the traffic situation and prevent the accident in advance by driving the vehicle safely.
Nevertheless, the Defendant failed to properly operate the operation system under the influence of alcohol while neglecting this, and caused the following parts of the Victim E (33) who tried to park in behind the Defendant’s car due to the negligence of not operating the operation system under the influence of alcohol.
Ultimately, the Defendant driven the said car in a situation where normal driving is difficult due to the influence of drinking, and suffered injury such as a multi-pactlock, etc. which requires treatment for about four days to the victim E.
B. The lower court’s determination is as follows.