logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2019.01.10 2018고정1011
교통사고처리특례법위반
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is a person engaging in driving a bicycle.

On May 30, 2016, the Defendant operated bicycles at around 09:48, and proceeded with the Library 180 Na-ro, Youngnam-si, Seoul, with the face of the Library 180 Na-ro.

It is divided into a sidewalk and a roadway for pedestrian traffic, so in such a case, a person engaged in driving service has a duty of care to proceed to a roadway.

Nevertheless, the Defendant had a bicycle go beyond the road by driving a bicycle, such as the victim C (the age of 65) who was a victim on a brupt report, due to the negligence in which the Defendant committed a brupt report, and had the bicycle go beyond the road.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury to the above victim by negligence in the course of performing the above duties, which requires approximately two weeks medical treatment.

2. Determination

A. According to the records of this case, the place where the accident of this case occurred is recognized as a combined road for bicycles and pedestrians as defined in Article 3 subparagraph 2 of the Act on the Promotion of the Use of Bicycles, and which constitutes a bicycle lane as defined in Article 2 subparagraph 8 of the Road Traffic Act, and bicycle riders can pass through the relevant road (Article 13-2 of the Road Traffic Act), and further, the relevant road does not constitute a "road divided into a sidewalk and a roadway" as defined in Article 13 (1) of the Road Traffic Act. Thus, it is difficult to recognize that the defendant was negligent in dealing with the traffic accident under Article 3 (2) proviso 9 of the Act on Special Cases concerning

Therefore, the above facts charged should be pronounced not guilty under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act because it constitutes a case where there is no proof of a crime. However, as seen below, as long as the prosecution is dismissed as to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents resulting from Occupational Injury resulting from Occupational and Injury

(b).

arrow