beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant has not driven a motor vehicle at the time stated in the facts charged.
2. Determination
A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the following facts can be acknowledged.
(1) On June 20, 2014, at around 23:50, the Defendant’s vehicle was parked (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) and then fell into the E-owned H-Wing car, which was parked later. At the time, the Defendant was boarding the instant vehicle, and the wheels of the instant vehicle was returned to the right side.
(2) The Defendant reported 112 immediately after the accident. At the time, the Defendant reported to the effect that “the vehicle in the front and rear is not flick, and the accident occurred.” The Defendant expressed to the same purport as the police officers dispatched to the site, and argued to be the victim.
(3) On the day of the accident, the Defendant got a substitute engineer after having finished a ceremony with the volunteer teacher, but the Defendant did not find the place where the instant vehicle parked, and thus, the Defendant returned to the substitute engineer. After which the Defendant found the instant vehicle, there was no fact that the substitute engineer again was a substitute engineer before he gets on board the driver, such as paragraph (1).
(4) After four (4) days from the date of the accident, the Defendant asserted that “I am on the instant car driver’s seat and am on the air-conditioner and am on the air-conditioner, am on the part of the Defendant, who was investigated by the investigative agency, and later became more than 1m of the start-up after the start-up of the car.”
However, the Defendant did not talk to the above purport to the police officers dispatched to the scene at the time of the accident, and the Defendant used the instant vehicle starting in the situation where the Defendant was going through bracking to drive the instant automobile due to the circumstances like the Defendant’s assertion.