logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2015.05.12 2014노2420
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error 1) The Defendant was making a left turn in the direction of E, but the victim, who was driving the Ortoba in the direction of E, was faced with the Defendant’s vehicle by getting out of the way to avoid the Defendant’s vehicle, and thus, the accident is not caused by the Defendant’s negligence. 2) After the accident, the Defendant called “a person to hospital” to the victim, and the victim continued to have a telephone conversation, called “a person to leave the hospital,” and she called “a person to leave the hospital,” and she called “a person to leave the hospital at the time,” and she did not return to the scene of the accident. As such, there was no intention to escape.

B. The lower court’s punishment (one month of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, two years of social service, and two hundred hours of imprisonment) is too unreasonable in light of the fact that the revocation of the driver’s license of unfair sentencing is considerably unfavorable to the Defendant.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following facts and circumstances, the lower court’s judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts can be found guilty of the facts charged of this case, and the above assertion is without merit.

1) The victim stated from the investigative agency to the court of the court below that “When the victim was in a direct position from the 46th country map to the 46th country map, the accident occurred from the defendant’s entry to the right-hand turn to the right-hand turn.” The police officer who investigated the accident site stated that “I do not state any assertion that “the victim’s ozone on the E direction turns off along with the victim’s vehicle, who was in the E direction, was faced with the Defendant’s vehicle” at the time of the on-site investigation.

3 The Defendant, after the accident, talks with the victim that "to cut off a motor vehicle adjacent to a motor vehicle" without providing relief measures or informing the victim of contact information, and leaves the site as they are.

arrow