beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Criminal facts
The Defendant is a person engaged in driving CEX car.
On August 20, 2016, the Defendant driven the above car at around 09:52, and continued the front road E in Ansan-si, Andong-si, with the front road from the NAF to the new market room.
Since there is a one-lane road in which vehicles are parked on both sides of the road, the driver has a duty of care to safely operate by accurately operating the steering system, steering system, and brakes.
However, the Defendant neglected to do so and went on on the right side of the road and received the part on the left side of the victim F (W, 83 years old), which was located on the right side of the road, from the right side of the said vehicle, to the right side of the said vehicle.
Ultimately, even if the Defendant suffered from an injury to the left-hand part of the 4 weeks of medical treatment due to the above occupational negligence, the Defendant immediately stopped the victim and escaped without taking necessary measures, such as providing relief to the injured party.
Summary of Evidence
1. Partial statement of the defendant;
1. Statement of inspection by this court;
1. A written statement related to G;
1. A survey report on actual conditions;
1. Ratification (Confirmation of the course of issuance of a medical certificate and the revised medical certificate attached thereto) (The existence of the necessity of relief measures in the event of a traffic accident shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the victim’s injury level and degree, the content of the accident and circumstances after the accident, the starting point, circumstances, period and contents of medical treatment, the victim’s age and health conditions, etc. However, in large cases, it may be determined that the defendant, by directly dialogue with the victim, either gives the victim an opportunity to make pain statements or stopping the defendant at least is unnecessary to take relief measures, and if not, there was no need to take relief measures.
It may not be easily determined (Supreme Court Decision 2005. 5. 10. 10).