(영문) 청주지방법원 2015.07.17 2015노296 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 청주지방법원 2015.07.17 2015노296

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등

Text

Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of the facts charged in this case and the judgment of the court below

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a person who is engaged in driving a C-A-hurd passenger vehicle.

On July 16, 2014, at around 00:05, the Defendant driven the said vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.116% 0.16%, and led the vehicle to proceed in front of the E-cafeteria D from the later side of the modern apartment zone to the second handdiological hospital.

At that time, the defendant was going to proceed with the night-time day and entered the right by making a bypass, so the defendant had a duty of care to thoroughly operate the steering gear and to prevent the accident by properly manipulating the steering gear.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, was under the influence of alcohol and was under the influence of the Defendant’s driver’s license in the front part of the driving seat of the Defendant’s vehicle in front of the driving seat of the driver’s license, who was under the influence of the driver’s license and was under the influence of the driver’s license and was under the influence of the driver’s license and the driving seat of the driver’s license in front of the driving seat of the driver’s license.

Ultimately, the Defendant, due to the above occupational negligence, sustained injury to the victim, such as the chilling of the second string of the second string that requires the treatment of approximately three weeks, and at the same time, destroyed the said stringing car by the repair cost of KRW 1,445,431, and escaped without taking necessary measures, such as stopping, and providing relief to the victim.

B. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated, the lower court’s judgment is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant was in breach of the central line, and further, there was negligence on the Defendant in the occurrence of the instant traffic accident.

In light of the above, the defendant's drinking and the traffic accident of this case cannot be recognized as having causations.

유사 판례

-청주지방법원 제천지원 2014.12.11 2014고단469

-청주지방법원 제천지원 2015.01.15 2014고단173

-청주지방법원 제천지원 2014.10.23 2014고단330

-청주지방법원 제천지원 2015.05.21 2015고단5

-청주지방법원 제천지원 2015.03.26 2015고단2