logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2015.05.28 2015고정447
교통사고처리특례법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On November 8, 2014, at around 00:55, the Defendant driven a B rocketing taxi, and driven the front road of the Red Tacking Zone of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Mapo-gu, along the speed of about 20 km in the direction of the East Tridong (hereinafter referred to as the bus exclusive lane) in the direction of the East Tridong.

At night, there was a duty of care to safely drive a person who is engaged in driving on the road by an intersection where signal lights are installed at night. At this time, there was a duty of care to reduce the speed and drive the road in accordance with good faith by checking the right and the right and the right.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and neglected to stop, and caused the front part of the victim E (the victim E (the 22 years old) who crosses the crosswalk to the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle, which was normally straight onto the green signal in the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle, from the red-fluence room by negligence of disregarding and straighting it. The front part of the victim C(the 49 years old) driving that was normally straight onto the green signal in the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle. After the accident, the Defendant continued without stopping after the accident, and continued without stopping, led the victim E (the 22 years old) who crosses the crosswalk to the green signal from the right side of the vehicle to the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered, by its occupational negligence, the injury to the victim C, such as salt, tension, etc. of the bones of verte that requires two weeks of treatment, the injury to the victim F (31 years of age) who was on board the damaged vehicle, the injury to the scopical scopium, the injury to the scopical scopium, the injury to the scopical scopium, the injury to the victim G (19 years of age) who was on board the Defendant vehicle requiring two weeks of treatment, the injury to the scopical scopium, the injury to the scopical scopium that requires two weeks of treatment to the victim H (19 years of age), and the injury to the victim E, such as the left-hand scopium that requires two weeks of treatment, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1...

arrow