logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2017.02.02 2016고정736
도로교통법위반(사고후미조치)등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in the service of operating a C beer and a cruise motor vehicle.

On February 20, 2016, the Defendant driven the above vehicle around 21:10, and moved back the back road D and E from the backside of the changed north-ro to the shot distance from the backside of the new north-ro.

At the time, there was a vehicle that was stopped on a narrow side road, so in such a case, there was a duty of care to reduce the speed and to keep the right and the right on the front side well and safely.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and proceeds by neglecting it, and received the back part of the upper right side of the Defendant’s vehicle’s Gtoscar car driving G (43 Do) with the part on the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle driving.

Ultimately, the Defendant did not take necessary measures, even though he did not damage the repair cost of the above damaged vehicle by occupational negligence as above, to require KRW 150,000.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. Application of the statutes governing photographs of damaged vehicles, estimates of damaged vehicles, and photographs of affected vehicles;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148 and 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The portion not guilty under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which is the order of provisional payment

1. On February 20, 2016, the Defendant driven C vehicle at a section of approximately 150 meters in the vicinity of the Sungnam-si Regu, A, and E from around 7288-9, while under the influence of alcohol 0.057% during blood transfusion on February 20, 2016.

2. Determination

A. The defendant and his defense counsel had a person driving alcohol after drinking at the time. However, since the above amount was measured by 30 minutes after the defendant completed drinking, the so-called blood alcohol concentration increase season is measured. Thus, the defendant's person is based on this.

arrow