logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2013.11.26 2013노344
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding and misunderstanding of legal principles) is that the defendant's vehicle entered the intersection before the victim's vehicle enters the intersection, so there is no obligation to take relief measures against the defendant.

(1) At the time of the accident, there was no need to take relief measures because the victim was in no way to have the victim injured, and there was no place to appear externally, and there was no need to take relief measures as the injury of the victim would be naturally cured.

(2) The Defendant did not have any intention to flee, such as lending the victim’s name to the victim by using a cell phone and allowing the victim to call the phone.

(3) In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the claim No. 1 on the board, that is, the distance in which the accident of this case occurred is similar to the width of the road driven by the defendant vehicle and the width of the road driven by the victim vehicle at the intersection without any signal; and that the defendant vehicle and the victim vehicle appear to have entered the said intersection at the same time (in the case of the collision with the defendant vehicle on the top of the collision, it cannot be readily concluded that the defendant vehicle entered the said distance first because there is no evidence that the speed of both vehicles was identical, and that the defendant vehicle driven while driving the vehicle at drinking, unlike the victim, the defendant's negligence in relation to the accident of this case does not exceed the fault of the victim.

Furthermore, even if there is no fault of the defendant with regard to the instant accident, if the result of the traffic accident is in need of measures to rescue the victim and restore traffic order, the obligation shall be interpreted as an obligation imposed on the driver of the relevant vehicle who has caused the traffic accident regardless of intention, negligence, liability or illegality in the occurrence of the accident, and the cause is attributable to the relevant accident.

arrow