logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.08.29 2016노3556
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal: ① The defendant is not a driver of a household who caused a traffic accident but a victim of a traffic accident; ② the injury of the victims is minor and does not constitute an injury under the Criminal Act; ③ even if the injury falls under the category of injury, there was no need to take relief measures; thus, there was no intention

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s negligence in the occurrence of a traffic accident by the Defendant’s lawfully adopted and investigated evidence, i.e., the victims caused a traffic accident by shocking the Defendant’s vehicle consistently straighted from the investigation stage to the lower court’s trial.

On the other hand, the defendant stated that the victims changed the fleet at the first time.

The person who made a statement but reversed it and caused a traffic accident by changing the fleet.

However, in light of the fact that the judgment of the court below reversed it again and the victim's change of the fleet is the cause of a traffic accident, and that the damaged vehicle immediately after the accident is in a state of right away from the vehicle line, and that the quith of the quith is also toward the left side, while the defendant's vehicle was in a state of right towards the left side, it can be recognized that the defendant sufficient fact that the damaged vehicle was directly under the direction of the change of the fleet is a victim who caused a traffic accident. Thus, the defendant is a victim who caused a traffic accident.

B. The degree of injury suffered by the victims is as follows based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., ① in the original court, the victims did not have a safety bell, the victims E was faced with body inside the vehicle due to the shock of the accident, and the victims G suffered a large number of body in the future.

The statement is <2> E is diagnosed by the doctor of the second week after the date of the occurrence of the accident, and 3. The related pictures and estimates are reviewed.

arrow