logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2012.09.27 2012고정2314
교통사고처리특례법위반
Text

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person engaging in driving Cone Star Car.

On March 9, 2012, the Defendant driven the above car at around 15:00, and moved the road in front of the filial 2 Dong community service center in Gyeyang-gu, Incheon, Gyeyang-dong, which is located in 162-8.

At the time, since the defendant was moving back to a narrow road as a two-lane wide road, the defendant engaged in driving motor vehicles has a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance as he/she gets safe by living well behind the road.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so, and stopped at the two-lanes of the above Part, and was driven by the victim D(37 years of age) who stops at the two-lanes of the above Part, in front of the right side of the vehicle of the Defendant.

As a result, the Defendant suffered from the victim’s injury, such as saved salt panion for about two weeks, by the foregoing negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Results of the verification of black boxes and videos in this Court;

1. A report on the occurrence of a traffic accident and a report on actual condition investigation;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to questions, answers, and mandatory records, medical certificates, and written estimates;

1. Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Special Cases concerning the Selection of Punishment, Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the selection of fines;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The Defendant asserts that the instant accident was merely a minor contact accident and thus did not cause any injury to the victim, as to the Defendant’s assertion of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

In light of the evidence of this case, the victim's vehicle was shocked to the extent that the victim's vehicle might be shaken on the left and right by the accident, and the victim was diagnosed by F's Council members after this accident, "Saeum chlorates, chlostal chlostal chlostal chlostal chlostal, chlostal chlostal chlostal, chlostal chlostal chlostal chlostal, and hospitalized treatment from March 10 to March 30, 2012.

arrow