logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2020.04.21 2020고단95
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(위험운전치상)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On September 26, 2012, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 4 million at the Gangseo branch court of the Chuncheon District Court as a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving).

【Criminal Facts】

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving two cargo vehicles B.

1. Around 22:20 on December 8, 2019, the Defendant driven the said vehicle under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of about 0.204% from the section of approximately 3.6km from the front of the D restaurant located in Gangnam-si C to the front of the Fridge located in the same city E.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice.

2. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bodily Injury resulting from Dangerous Driving) led the Defendant to drive the said car at a difficult time due to the influence of alcohol as above, and drive the said car at a two-lane road in front of the Fridge E in Gangseo-si, Gangnam-si, along with two-lanes in front of the Fhill-si.

At that time, there is a night and a remote intersection where vehicle traffic is frequent, so in such a case, there was a duty of care for those engaged in driving duties to see the front door well, observe the wheel line, and accurately operate the steering wheel and brake system.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected his/her duty to drive normally due to the influence of alcohol as seen above and did not continue to drive in the front-down city without properly doing so. The Defendant’s negligence, which led the victim G (55 years old) who was in the atmosphere of the signal signal pursuant to the stop signals of the Mamac-in intersection, led to the shocking part of the front-hand part of the Defendant’s car.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as salt, tension, etc., in need of approximately two weeks of treatment due to occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's legal statement 1. G

1. A medical certificate;

1. The actual condition survey report;

arrow