logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.10.30 2014노1431
교통사고처리특례법위반등
Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The instant accident was very minor and the Defendant did not recognize that the victims suffered an injury, and the Defendant expressed his intent to assume liability for damages due to an accident, such as giving the victim D an order, and only runs away from the scene, and there was no intention to commit an escape crime, and thus, there was no intention to commit an illegal sentencing. 2) The sentence of a fine of KRW 8 million imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts

A. In the case of the crime of escape driving under Article 5-3 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, if the driver of the accident escaped from the scene prior to performing his/her duty under Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding the victim although he/she was aware of the fact that the victim was killed due to the accident, even if the driver of the accident provided the data capable of verifying his/her identity to the victim prior to leaving the scene of the accident, it constitutes "when he/she escaped without taking measures under Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act such as aiding the victim

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Do250 Decided March 12, 2004). Whether there was a need to take measures, such as providing relief to a victim after an accident, should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the details and details of the accident, the age and degree of the victim’s injury, and the circumstances following the accident. However, in order to recognize that Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act grants emergency relief responsibility to a person who caused the accident, there was no need to take measures, such as providing relief to the victim, the victim actively expressed that the need to take relief measures is unnecessary.

or other emergency measures.

arrow