logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 통영지원 2016.04.28 2015고단45
교통사고처리특례법위반등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] On August 25, 201, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 4 million due to a violation of road traffic law (drinking driving) in the Changwon District Court’s branch on August 25, 201, and on October 25, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a violation of road traffic law (drinking driving) at the Changwon District Court’s branch on October 25, 201 and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a total of five times.

[Criminal facts]

1. On November 30, 2014, the Defendant, in violation of the Road Traffic Act (drinking) driven B strawing cars with approximately 4km alcohol concentration 0.187% from the 4km section to the front road of the dead forest located in the luminous death drawings in the city of Gyeong-gu, Gyeongnam-do, through the Gyeonglllling-do.

2. The Defendant in violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents is a person engaging in driving a rocketing motor vehicle.

On November 30, 2014, under the influence of alcohol content 0.187% in blood, the Defendant driven the said vehicle while driving it at a level of 0.187%, and driven the two-lane road in front of the bamboo elementary school, which is located in the luminous death drawing drawing at a common time, along the two-lane road from the front side of the master apartment for death.

At the time, there is a three-distance intersection at night and at the front, a signal, etc., so there was a duty of care to thoroughly see the front-distance for those engaged in driving service, to ensure safety distance, to accurately manipulate the steering gear and brakes, and to prevent accidents from occurring.

Nevertheless, under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant was negligent in driving the Defendant’s vehicle in front of the Defendant’s vehicle, and found it late and operated to avoid this, but did not avoid it, and did not stop the Defendant’s vehicle in front of the Defendant’s vehicle and shocked the part of the Defendant’s vehicle behind the vehicle.

Ultimately, the Defendant is guilty of occupational negligence as above.

arrow