(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.04.21 2015노3387 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.04.21 2015노3387

도로교통법위반(사고후미조치)

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case even though he did not take all necessary measures and did not leave the site, since the Defendant, after the instant accident, sent contact information to the victim and moved to the office of the Defendant near the scene of the accident.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court against the Defendant (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. On April 26, 2015, the summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant: (a) driven a Cworksta car around 02:34 on April 26, 2015; (b) neglected to repair the said K5 taxi vehicle at a speed below the speed of speed from D apartment to 2nd apartment complex at the speed of speed; and (c) due to the negligence that led to the failure to repair the said vehicle at a speed below the speed of speed; and (d) the records on the records of the records of the records of the Victim-Inception Bank Co., Ltd., the owner of the damaged vehicle, the “Inc.,” the owner of the damaged vehicle, is deemed the victim “Inc.,” and (e) did not immediately stop the said K5 taxi vehicle at a speed of KRW 729,928 on the left side of the FK5 taxi vehicle, and did not immediately stop the said vehicle and take necessary measures to confirm the damage.

B. The lower court determined that the Defendant and his defense counsel left the scene with the consent of the victim and G.

However, according to each legal statement between the victim and G, the victim and the victim did not leave the vehicle to the inside of the D apartment without the consent of the victim, and the victim did not leave the vehicle to the inside of the D apartment without the consent of G and caused the victim to find the defendant. The victim found the defendant's vehicle at the parking lot, but the defendant did not receive the mobile phone in the vehicle, and accordingly, the defendant needs to do so at the time of the occurrence of the traffic accident.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2015.10.22 2015고정1084

-수원지방법원 2021.02.19 2020구단4677

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2017.06.08 2017고단860

-대구지방법원 2019.01.10 2018고단4747

-전주지방법원 2017.06.13 2017고단475