logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2017.07.10 2017고단1055
교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)
Text

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for six 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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of B Poter cargo vehicles.

On March 29, 2017, the Defendant was driving in the vicinity of the 7th door door of the Papju-si in the front of the 08:40 on March 29, 2017, the Defendant suffered from the Defendant’s injury, such as cutting down the body of the victim C (V, 30 years of age) who walked on the crosswalk of the pedestrian signal green signal, due to the occupational negligence going in violation of the signal signal signal of the motor vehicle signal signal, and caused the Defendant’s injury, such as cutting down the upper part of the cargo of the Defendant, which requires approximately 10 weeks medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. C’s statement;

1. A survey report on actual conditions;

1. A report on the occurrence of traffic accidents;

1. An accident scene photograph;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

1. Article 3 (1) and the proviso to Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents under the relevant Act concerning criminal facts, Article 268 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act [the scope of recommending punishment] There is no basic area (4 months to 1 year) of the first type of traffic accident (the person causing a traffic accident) [the sentence] [the decision of sentence] the victim's injury is large enough for the victim to wear the crosswalks of the pedestrian (the victim's statement is due to the victim's statement), and the defendant's negligence is large (the defendant's previous representative's vehicle is merely a violation of the pedestrian signal, and the accident in this case does not occur immediately after the alteration of the signal).

Although a comprehensive insurance has been subscribed, there has not been any agreement or deposit.

arrow