Violation of the Traffic Act (unnecessary Measures) and Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents

(Death) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Bodily Injury)

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for four years.

The prosecutor's appeal against the acquittal portion of the judgment below is dismissed.

(a) A prosecutor;

1) In light of the facts charged in the instant case, in full view of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Death) and the Act on the Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Death or Injury), the violation of the Act on the Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) and the condition of consciousness among the facts charged, there was sufficient awareness of the Defendant at the time when considering the images of the instant traffic accident, opinions of doctors, and circumstances after the accident, etc., it appears that there was a clear comparison between the past traffic accident due to the outbreak of brain dyslaf by the Defendant and the vehicle operation type at the time of the instant traffic accident. According to the Defendant’s usual driving style and the opinion of the specialist of the vehicle, it can be deemed that the Defendant voluntarily driven a dangerous driving, and considering the fact that the Defendant had been driving a vehicle that regularly handles hand over with his own speed after the first accident, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged.

2) In the event that the facts charged in the instant case were indicted in a preliminary indictment (the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) and the violation of the Road Traffic Act (the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes)], and where the facts charged in the preliminary indictment are found guilty, the judgment of the conjunctive facts charged are stated in the text and reasoning, and the court below rendered a verdict of innocence as to the facts charged in the primary charge only for the reasons that

B. The Defendant [the Defendant’s violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents under the premise that no consciousness exists among the facts charged in the instant case (Death or Injury) and violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the

The sentence of the court below against the defendant (five years of imprisonment without prison labor) is too unreasonable.

2. Prosecutor's assertion of mistake

A. Summary of this part of the facts charged

(1) Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bodily Injury) and the Road Traffic Act

On July 17:13, 2016, the Defendant driven a C Fast Driving Vehicle, which led to a three-lane road in front of the second apartment zone in Busan Shipping Daegu Metropolitan City, along with two-lanes from the area of the Daecheon Park to the area of the D Hospital.

The Defendant had a duty of care to maintain the body and mental state suitable for driving, such as eating drugs in full, as he/she can be mixed with consciousness that does not drink with cerebral typhism due to cerebral typhism, and thus, he/she has a duty of care.

In addition, the Defendant, prior to the same direction, was behind the FEXN car driven by the victim E (the age of 34). In such a case, the Defendant had a duty of care to safely drive the car without any conflict with other vehicles by accurately manipulating the front side and the left side and the left side, and accurately manipulating the steering and the steering system of the car.

Nevertheless, the Defendant was negligent in driving a vehicle and received the back part of the above X-ray vehicle as the front part of the Defendant’s driving.

Ultimately, the Defendant, by the above occupational negligence, sustained injury to the victim E and the victim G (the age of 31) who was on board the above X-ray car, such as light fat, tensions, etc. in need of approximately two weeks of treatment, and at the same time, destroyed the above X-ray car to be 424,408 won of repair cost, such as replacement of back fater, etc., but escaped without making a stop and taking necessary measures.

2) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.

After causing the primary accident as mentioned in paragraph (1) above, the Defendant fleded from the large-scale Park Protection Zone to three-lanes from the large-scale Park Protection Zone.

The Defendant: (a) has stopped another vehicle at an intersection in the three-lane crossings; (b) has been plucked by the Defendant’s operation of the Defendant; (c) has gone through the road between the front-way road and the sidewalk block, and has gone through the intersection, and continues to go along the two-lanes of the three-lane road; (d) has stopped along the two-lanes of the three-lane road, and (e) has gone through the intersection as it is after changing the course of the said Pock vehicle to the three-lane crossings; and (e) has again proceeded along the three-lanes of the three-lane road; and (e) has gone through the intersection as it is; (e) has gone along the three-lane road along the front-way road, and (e) has come well to the two-lane and one-lane road traffic zone; and (e) has to go through the road operation center at a speed of 790 meters from the point of accident and at a speed of 17:14, and (e) has to observe the two-way road operation zone.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, while proceeding at a speed exceeding a speed of 138 km at a speed exceeding 78km per hour, followed by the negligence of violating the pedestrian signal and the stop signal of the crossing crossing, and led the victim H (the 52-year-old driver), who was waiting in front of the moving direction, to the front part of the Defendant’s driving, brought down the back part of the 13-year-old passenger vehicle in front of the moving direction to the right side of the Defendant’s driving, and followed the victim J (the 13-year-old driver), K (the 13-year-old), K (the 13-year-old), and the Defendant’s moving along the bicycle to the left side from the moving direction to the left side of the Defendant’s driving direction to the front part of the 6-year-old passenger vehicle in front of the 69-year-old passenger vehicle in front of the victim M (the 69-year-old driver’s license) or the front part of the 5-year-old passenger vehicle in front front of the PM market.

In addition, as seen above, the victim driver's rocketing taxi of the victim driver's M who was driven by the defendant driver's vehicle had the victim S(S. 26 years old), who was in progress under the new subparagraph, continued to drive the victim S(S. 26 years old)'s observer, U(Nam, 46 years old) driving.

As a result, the Defendant caused the death of the victimJ from the above occupational negligence due to the second damage, etc. in his/her workplace as well as the death of 3 persons, such as the list of crimes in the attached Table, and suffered injury to 19 persons.

B. The judgment of the court below

1) Only the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court may be sufficiently suspected of having been aware of the Defendant.

(1) Whether it is possible for a person without consciousness to drive a motor vehicle, such as changing a lane? The defendant runs away from the second lane to the third lane and changing the lane into the third lane, while the defendant coming to the intersection, the motor vehicle stopped in the third lane to the narrow space on the right side of the third lane in order to avoid the vehicle, and the next two lanes in front of the two-lanes in front of the two-lanes in front of the park entrance in front of the two-lane in front of the park entrance in front of the two-lane in front of the park entrance in front of the two-lane in front of the park entrance, changing the course to the right side side of the vehicle waiting in front of the park entrance, again changing the course to the two-lane in front of the road entrance.

The defendant has changed the course at a considerable speed, and the defendant has done a regular driving, such as changing the lane, in order to avoid the front line vehicle, etc. by operating the hand directly according to the traffic situation.

It is questionable whether the defendant would have been able to drive if he had lost consciousness at the time.

(2) Medical opinions

When the defendant found a hospital as a scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic s

• After reviewing the "medical records of the Defendant", WW Hospital brain death X", the Defendant is considered to be brain-dead patients. From a medical power perspective based on anti-satis, it is unlikely that 17:00 will occur if he/she does not drink a drug that takes twice a day. The occurrence of the first accident and the second accident at approximately 790 meters away from the second to the second accident site, the situation of the change of course is very low likely to occur during the course. In general, the Defendant stated to the effect that it is impossible to proceed to the extent of 700 meters if there is no food.

• The result of the mental appraisal of the Medical Treatment and Custody Center also argues that the Defendant was in a room and memory at the time of the instant crime, but it cannot be presumed that the Defendant’s ability to distinguish things or decision-making ability was damaged or lost in light of the video recordings (CCTV).

③ At the time of the accident, the Defendant was not in a state without consciousness. Thirdly, the fire fighter at the site of the instant traffic accident asked his personal information to verify the Defendant’s state, and asked him to answer exactly, but asked him not to memory about the accident situation. In addition, the Defendant made a statement to the effect that he did not feel abnormal, such as the Defendant’s behavior, speculation, discussion, and downseement.

In addition, the Z witness of the defendant immediately after the traffic accident in this case opened the door of the defendant's vehicle after arrival of 119, and the defendant, alone, was seated on the ging or on the road. The fire was pushed down to the defendant, and the defendant was able to take a bath, and the latter statement was made to the effect that "".

2) However, considering the following circumstances admitted by the lower court based on the evidence adopted and examined by the lower court, it is difficult to readily conclude that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was the awareness of the Defendant, and the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the charges on the ground that there is no

Furthermore, the burden of proof for the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial is the prosecutor, and the recognition of guilt is insufficient to the extent of superior probative value, and it is based on the evidence with probative value sufficient for the judge to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true. If there is no such evidence, it is not easy to readily conclude that the defendant had awareness as much as the interests of the defendant, even if there is doubt about the defendant's guilt, even if there is no such evidence.

(1) The defendant suffers from cerebrovascular, and has lost his/her consciousness and caused a traffic accident.

• On November 19, 2015, the eight months prior to the instant accident, the Defendant: (a) was driving on the front road of the Yandong-dong Bukdong-gu, Busan on November 19, 2015; (b) was killed in awareness; (c) was diagnosed by a doctor AB of Ulsan AA Hospital; (d) was diagnosed by cerebral cerebrs (livers); (c) was diagnosed by a doctor AB; and (e) was diagnosed by a cerebral cerebrs (livers). The Defendant was diagnosed by a doctor at the AC hospital located in Busan; and (d) the Defendant was diagnosed by a doctor at the AD hospital located in Ulsan, which was diagnosed to have a problem on the side of cerebrs; (e) was diagnosed by a doctor at the AD hospital located in Ulsan B; and (e) on April 2014, there was no doubt that there was no cerebral cerebrs from the AEI Hospital’s daily life.

② In light of the instant behavior, it is difficult to deem that the instant driving act is a normal driver.

• From the first accident, as if he was a graduate driving or drunk driving, the driver who was in a state of normal driving ability, i.e., a driver who was in a state of normal driving ability, has shocked the vehicle that was driven in front of the same lane as it is and re-sused. 1)

- The Defendant was so dangerous that it is difficult to view that a normal person had been driving. In other words, after the first accident, the Defendant, while leaving the vehicle which was stopped despite the intersection stop signal, passed through the intersection at a narrow space on the right side of the right side, even though they were living in the narrow space, and passing through the intersection at a strict speed. The Defendant’s vehicle passed through the intersection at the intersection as one stop of the two buses.

In light of the defendant's height and speed, the defendant's vehicle height and speed, the defendant's three-lanes in which the defendant is running, and the two-lanes in which many vehicles were signaled, the defendant passed the bus intersection at a rapid speed, even though it was impossible to see in advance that the defendant would not pass through the bus intersection due to the bus price.

In addition, when the second accident occurred, the vehicle which was in the traffic signal atmosphere continued in the first way and caused the second accident of this case while shocking those who dried the crosswalk. The vehicle is stopped in front of the defendant's running lane, and there are people in the front of the crosswalk, so it is difficult to see that the person who passed the ceremony is driving.

The driving act was so dangerous that the defendant himself could die.

③ There is no reason to escape from the first accident by the Defendant. The first accident by the Defendant is a minor contact accident, and there is no reason to escape therefrom. In the event of insurance management with a comprehensive insurance subscribed by the Defendant, there is no legal responsibility for the Defendant, and vehicles have considerably low time compared to the absence of any particular economic disadvantage, and in the case of a three-lane main road, it is difficult to track the vehicle into CCTV or black land. Therefore, there was much more disadvantages or risks that the Defendant would suffer from the escape.

(4) The circumstances after accidents occur.

The defendant stated to police officers, etc. that the accident situation immediately after the accident does not memory.

Such facts are confirmed by first aid workers Y (Evidence No. 671 of the evidence records), police officers on the spot YG (Evidence No. 552 of the evidence records) and other statements.

Victim AH stated that the Defendant was a non-defluence of the charge (Evidence Record 408 pages).

⑤ The medical opinion/W hospital brain death X determined that it is difficult for the Defendant to view the instant accident as a state in which he/she had no consciousness at the time of the instant accident, but could not exclude the possibility of action occurring during the process of the occurrence.

According to the paper of the Canadian Brithic Bribery Association, patients with cerebral Bribery began to engage in repeated actions that had continued to exist, such as bicycle riding or driving, etc., the clinical report was made that the patients with cerebral Bribery continued to apply for the front of diving and continued mechanical actions (including driving, etc.) that had continued to exist.

Examining the circumstances revealed in detail by the lower court based on the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, closely examining the records and records, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to acknowledge the guilty of this part of the facts charged.

If there are such circumstances, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the prosecutor, and the prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. Prosecutor's assertion of misapprehension of legal principle

For the purpose of Article 254(5) of the Criminal Procedure Act, several criminal facts and several applicable provisions of Acts may be stated in preliminary or alternatively, to the extent that the identity of criminal facts is recognized between several criminal facts, as well as in a case where several criminal facts are recognized to constitute several criminal facts because the date, place, means and objects of the crimes are different from each other, they may be stated in preliminary or alternatively (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 65Do114, Mar. 24, 196).

(4) On July 31, 2016, the lower court found Defendant E (the 6th anniversary of the instant case’s charges) to be the victim’s 6th of the instant case’s violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the Road Traffic Act (the 6th of the instant case’s violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes; Defendant E (the 1st of the instant case’s violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) and Defendant E (the 1st of the instant case’s violation of the Act on the Astring of the 1st of the instant case’s violation of the Act on the Astring of the 6th of the instant case’s violation of the 6th of the Act on the Astring of the 7th of the 1st of the 7th of the 2nd of the 7th of the 1st of the 1st of the 1st of the 2nd of the 7th of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 3th of the st of the death.

Although the facts charged by the court below are charged as preliminary charges on the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Death and Injury) which the court below found guilty, and on the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Death and Injury) and the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Death and Injury) in the form of a violation of the Road Traffic Accidents Act and the Road Traffic Act (Death and Injury) as seen above, each of the charges is in a concurrent crime

Therefore, in case where some of the crimes are found not guilty, it is necessary to judge the indication of the order and the reasons according to the number of charges. Thus, it is reasonable for the court below to hold the defendant not guilty of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the violation of the Road Traffic Act in the disposition, and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as argued by

4. Defendant’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing

The crime of this case is the case of "One-person's Mag-man's Mag-man's death." The defendant, while driving without hiding his brain-related disease, renewed his driver's license, caused a liveration, and received a driver's own consciousness, and three persons, such as a person who was walking along the crosswalk and a person who was going under his own consciousness pursuant to the new name, etc. due to the above accident, lose 19 persons, etc. who were on leave in the Busan Maritime Authority, and suffered a serious result of the injury. In light of the contents of the crime, the crime is very heavy. The bereaved family members of the deceased complain about serious mental and physical pain due to the loss of their families, and the remaining victims are not living normally due to the Mag-man's death and are unable to live in normal life due to the accident, and the result of serious damage caused by the crime of this case is acknowledged as disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the Defendant made a confession of all of the facts found guilty during the instant crime for the first time in the trial, against the depth of the Defendant’s mistake; the Defendant agreed with the deceased, AI and the bereaved families of AJ and victims L, M,O, AH, and the Defendant’s vehicle is currently entering into comprehensive automobile insurance and driver insurance; the Defendant’s vehicle is currently undergoing basic compensation procedures, such as payment of medical expenses to victims; the Defendant has no history of criminal punishment exceeding the fine up to the present; the Defendant’s disease was confirmed on December 2, 201, and the cerebral cerebral conditions were considerably advanced during aquatic life with the diagnosis of the victims at around February 2017. The Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant was subject to unfair sentencing is difficult to receive from the Defendant’s life after being released from the court below’s age of two years since it appears that there was a high possibility that the Defendant would suffer from the above malopical disorder, even if it appears that the Defendant would suffer from the above malopical disorder.

5. Conclusion

Therefore, since the defendant's appeal is well-grounded, pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the part of the judgment below's conviction is reversed, and it is again decided as follows. Since the prosecutor's appeal against the acquittal among the judgment below is without merit, it is dismissed pursuant to Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure

The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence. The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by this court is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 3(1), proviso to Article 3(2)1, 3, and 6 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (Punishments provided for in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents against Victims J with the largest amount of penalty)

1. Selection of punishment;

Selection of imprisonment without labor

Judges Lee Jae-young

Judges Park Jong-young

I seem to have shown that the low-income and female friendlys had known that a food driver would drink or drive a stroke.

C. The statement was made "(Evidence Record 537 pages)" (Evidence Record 537 pages).