logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.09.06 2013고단2678
도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On November 27, 2007, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Seoul Central District Court on November 27, 2007 and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for the same kind of force once more.

【Criminal Facts】

1. Around 21:40 on March 11, 2013, the Defendant driven B 89c c Obaba in front of apartment apartment located in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, while under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.092%.

2. The Defendant in violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents is a person who is engaged in driving service B89cc.

At around 21:40 on March 11, 2013, the Defendant proceeded three lanes prior to Embrypt in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul with the 3-lane of Embrypt in the front of Embrypt of the U. S. S. S. S. S.

In such a case, the driver of the vehicle has a duty of care to prevent accidents by complying with the signal signal apparatus, keeping the right and the right, and safely driving the vehicle on the front door.

Nevertheless, the Defendant was negligent in neglecting the front of the road and proceeded with the red signal as it is, and the part of the victim C (the age of 40) who dried the crosswalk on the pedestrian driving signal was placed on the right side of the Defendant’s driving.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused injury to the victim by occupational negligence, such as brain salute, which requires approximately three weeks of medical treatment.

3. No motor vehicle which is not covered by mandatory insurance in violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act shall be operated on a road;

In addition, the defendant operated the above B Oba, which was not covered by mandatory insurance, at the time and place like the preceding paragraph.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written statement of the occurrence of a traffic accident C;

1. Statement on the circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Investigation reports (related to the application of the Tramark);

1. A written appraisal of blood alcohol;

1. Mandatory insurance certificate;

1. A medical certificate;

1. A previous conviction in judgment:

arrow