(영문) 창원지방법원 통영지원 2016.01.15 2015고단1140

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) 창원지방법원 통영지원 2016.01.15 2015고단1140

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a rocketing car.

On April 29, 2015, the Defendant driven the said car on the two-lane road in front of the gas charging station in common time D while under the influence of alcohol concentration in light of around 23:50, the Defendant driven the said car on the two-lane road in front of the gas charging station, and driven it from the direction of the traffic.

At the time, it is night and its place is 80 km per hour, so the driver has a duty of care to observe the speed limit in a clear mental state that is not drunk and to prevent accidents by properly examining the boom and the left and right of the driver.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and went about about about 102.7km/h while under the influence of alcohol as seen above, and shocked the Victim F (46 years old) who was walking along the right line on the right side of the mast by the Defendant.

Ultimately, even though the above occupational negligence caused the death of the victim by low-blood shock, the Defendant immediately stopped the victim and escaped without taking necessary measures, such as aiding the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Some of the protocol concerning the examination of the suspect against the defendant;

1. Part of each protocol concerning the suspect examination of the police against the accused;

1. Each police statement made to G, H, I, and J;

1. Protocol and list of seizure;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Each photograph, death certificate, written opinion, motion picture, reply to a request for the analysis of a traffic accident [the circumstances at the time of the accident at which the evidence is comprehensively admitted, the damaged part and degree of the accident vehicle, the behavior of the defendant taken after the accident occurred, and the defendant himself thought that he/she had shocked people or animals at the time of the accident at the investigative agency;

In light of the statement, even if the defendant did so, it was sufficiently aware that the victim of the accident of this case was shocked.

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2018.06.28 2018고단233

-창원지방법원 통영지원 2017.11.22 2017고단1338

-서울동부지방법원 2017.10.12 2017고단1560

-대전지방법원 천안지원 2017.06.22 2017고단1022

-청주지방법원 제천지원 2017.08.03 2017고단149