본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
(영문) 수원지방법원 안양지원 2018.05.11 2017고단2397

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.


Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a Crane car.

On September 18, 2017, the Defendant moved back to the direction of D commercial road in the direction of D commercial road from D commercial road to the direction of D commercial road.

Since there is a place where pedestrians are frequent in the commercial area, in such a case, there was a duty of care to check whether a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle is in the direction of proceeding by reducing speed and checking well the right and the right and the right of the motor vehicle and drive the motor vehicle safely.

Nevertheless, the defendant, while driving the above car, received the part of the bridge of the victim G (V, 7 years old) crossing the sidewalk in the direction of F apartment in the direction of E elementary school from the next negligence while driving the above car and let the victim go beyond the ground.

Ultimately, Defendant 1’s negligence caused the victim to be treated for about two weeks by the above occupational negligence, and the victim was faced with scambling in the following legs, other scambling parts, and scambling parts, but failed to immediately stop and take necessary measures, such as aiding the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. A H statement;

1. Reports (1), (2) on traffic accidents;

1. The photograph of case;

1. Medical certificate (G);

1. A criminal investigation report (STV recycling confirmation and attaching CCTV CDs);

1. The result of the CCTV reproduction in this court (the defendant and his defense counsel is going beyond his/her own discretion while avoiding the defendant's vehicle and there is a need for relief;

There is no intention to commit a crime of escape.

The argument is asserted.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted by the court and examined by the court, and the defendant was making a stop by driving the vehicle rapidly after driving the vehicle at the time of the instant case due to warning, and then moving the vehicle again.

In other words, the defendant is under these circumstances and any obstacle is left behind the vehicle.