logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 서부지원 2019.09.19 2019고단1620
도로교통법위반(사고후미조치)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months and by a fine of thirty million won.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On May 15, 2019, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and a fine of 300,000 won for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc., in the Seo-gu District Court Branch of the Daegu District Court, and appealed, and is still pending

【Criminal Facts】

1. Around 13:40 on March 25, 2019, the Defendant driving a vehicle without obtaining a driver’s license for CITI 100G 10G cIT on a section of about 10 km from the front day of Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu to the front day of the same Gu and the front day of the three km road.

2. The Defendant violated the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act: (a) operated CITI 100G 20G 100, which was not covered by mandatory insurance at the time and place specified in paragraph (1).

3. Violation of the Road Traffic Act (CIT) is a person who is engaged in driving service with CIT 100G 100.

The defendant, at the time and time under paragraph (1), proceeded with the front road of the Seogu Daegu-gu Seoul Metropolitan City D from the lower bank of the waterside to the lower bank of the waterside.

In such cases, there was a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by accurately manipulating the steering and brakes to those engaged in driving service.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and followed the Defendant’s negligence before the Defendant’s running direction by driving F. F. F.M. A.M. (37 years old) in front of the Defendant’s running direction.

Ultimately, the Defendant did not take necessary measures to damage the victim’s car due to the above occupational negligence but escaped without taking necessary measures.

4. The Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act, at the time and place set forth in Paragraph 3, destroyed the victim E’s Frocketing strawas set by Defendant’s driver’s Obatha, thereby damaging the victim’s vehicle to be repaired for repair costs for estimate.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The protocol of statement to E by the police;

arrow