logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.06.20 2013노4126
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the facts charged in the instant case of mistake of facts, with regard to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) and the violation of the Road Traffic Act (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) in the instant charges, the victim’s injury does not need to be treated, and thus, constitutes an injury under the Criminal Act. Even if the injury constitutes an injury, the Defendant did not take necessary

Therefore, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or by misunderstanding the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of a fine of KRW 3 million imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of misunderstanding of facts 1) The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of whether the victim was injured, whether the necessity for relief was recognized, and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., the victim submitted a medical certificate prepared by a doctor G to the effect that the victim needs to receive approximately two weeks of medical treatment due to the climatic and the climatic base, and actually received hospitalized treatment, etc., the victim can sufficiently be recognized that the victim suffered injury due to the damage of the completeness of the body due to the instant accident, the occurrence of a disability in life and the poor health condition, as well as the need for relief in light of the degree of injury to the victim and the medical treatment thereafter, it is recognized that there was a need for relief. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is without merit, and whether the intention to escape was recognized, whether necessary measures was implemented at the time of the occurrence of a traffic accident, and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., the victim’s contact at the time of the accident

arrow