logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2014.05.15 2014노97
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is as follows: (a) the confession of the Defendant and the mistake against the Defendant; (b) the Defendant’s driver’s car was covered by a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance; (c) the Defendant’s bereaved family does not punish the Defendant under the agreement with the bereaved family members of the victim D (hereinafter “victim”); (d) it is difficult to view that the Defendant clearly perceived that the Defendant was harming the victim’s misuse at the time of the instant accident; and (b) the Defendant did not have any criminal records other than a fine for one time due to drinking driving in 2011, in light of the fact that there is no other criminal records other than the history of fine for one time due to drinking driving in 201

2. Taking into account the circumstances alleged by the Defendant, each of the crimes of this case is deemed to result in the death of the victim due to the failure of the Defendant to take necessary measures, such as stopping the victim immediately while driving the vehicle on the road while under the influence of alcohol 0.096% under the influence of alcohol by negligence while neglecting his/her duty of care, and thus driving the vehicle on the road due to that shocking the victim, and providing relief to the victim, etc., and thus, the case is not easy. The drinking driving is a crime that may cause damage not only to himself/herself but also another person's life and body, and it is necessary to strictly punish the Defendant in accordance with the purport of the amended Road Traffic Act. In addition, if the Defendant escaped while driving the vehicle under the influence of alcohol, resulting in the death of the victim while driving the vehicle, resulting in the death of the victim, and the quality of the crime is not very good, considering the evidence duly adopted by the lower court and the Defendant's testimony at the trial and the witness at his/her own judgment, and the facts of the conflict between the vehicle and its own body.

arrow