교통사고처리특례법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. In full view of the summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding) L’s police, the court below’s statement, the investigation report analyzing the visual ct image (ct) video, the signal cycle, etc., the fact that the Defendant violated the signal at the time of the instant case is sufficiently recognized.
The judgment of the court below that sentenced the dismissal of prosecution without recognizing the fact that the defendant violated the signal, is erroneous and erroneous.
2. Determination
A. The prosecutor’s ex officio determination (revision of indictment) stated that the previous facts charged were maintained during the trial, and that the prosecutor’s violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents to Victims H among the facts charged in the instant case was against the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, and that the ancillary facts stated in the prosecutor’s application for changes of indictment as of April 29, 2015 stated that “the Defendant caused by negligence in the course of business to cause danger to the victim H or to cause an incurable or incurable disease to the victim H.” As such, among the facts charged in the instant case, the ancillary
In regard to the conjunctive applicable provisions of Acts, Article 3(1) and the proviso of Article 4(1)2 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act stated the applicable provisions in the applicable provisions of Acts, but this appears to be a clerical error, which appears to be a clerical error in the indictment, and Article 40 of the Criminal Act applied for permission to change the indictment with the addition of the ancillary charges
(B) On the other hand, the lower court’s judgment on this part was no longer maintained, as it became subject to a trial in the first instance trial.
However, even if the judgment of the court below has the above reasons for reversal of authority, the argument of mistake of facts about the primary facts charged by the prosecutor is still subject to the judgment of the court.
[Preliminary Facts] The Defendant is a freight truck for the removal of G.