logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.10.10 2018노982
교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The decision of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles, although the part with the rear wheels of the vehicle driving by the defendant was merely a part of the back wheels of the vehicle driving.

2. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, it can be recognized that the defendant's vehicle while the defendant's vehicle was behind the vehicle and caused the injury to the victim. Thus, the defendant's mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are without merit.

① According to the Defendant’s black image, it is confirmed that the Defendant’s vehicle, while the Defendant’s vehicle was moving back, was scambling, and the Defendant’s vehicle was scam and sounded.

At the time, Gwangju East East Police Station N Team 1, which confirmed the site, was in a state of shaking the vehicle due to the road surface of the road where the Defendant was driven by the vehicle.

I considered it.

② After the accident, the victim was treated in the emergency room of the Joseon University Hospital, and the doctor who was treated at the time diagnosed the victim’s illness by taking account of the victim’s statement, physical examination, X-ray test, etc., and confirmed that the victim’s injury level and symptoms were similar to the symptoms of other patients who were sent to the victim due to the reverse patient’s death, etc.

The victim returned to a military unit after the examination and treatment of the Joseon University Hospital, and received physical treatment at one Council member from three days thereafter, and received treatment, such as the fixed attendance at a college course, from the oriental medical hospital.

③ The Defendant asserts that the Defendant is not guilty in light of the following: (a) the Defendant would have no choice but to take the wheels; (b) the Defendant had no wheels; and (c) the victim was walking immediately after the accident.

arrow