logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2013.11.01 2013노1783
교통사고처리특례법위반
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant stopped at a bus stop but confirmed that there is no pedestrian on the crosswalk of the front side, and the victim D immediately cut off the crosswalk, and the defendant was going to go beyond India, and the defendant could not have predicted the occurrence of the same accident, and thus, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts, and the punishment (5 million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. The victim D is consistently stated at the investigative agency and the party court that the front side of the bus in front of the bus stop located in the Song-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seoul Metropolitan City, the front side of the bus in front of the bus bus in front of the defendant's drive, facing the victim's left side, and the right side of the bus after the two are faced with the front side of the bus. In light of the body and consistency of the statement, there is credibility in light of the body and consistency of the statement, and there is no circumstance to reject it.

In addition, the driver of any motor vehicle has a duty to stop so as not to obstruct or cause any danger to pedestrians crossing the crosswalk (Article 27(1) of the Road Traffic Act). In light of the purpose of these provisions, the driver of any motor vehicle has a heavy duty of care to protect pedestrians walking the crosswalk. Thus, the defendant cannot be viewed as being negligent in the occurrence of the accident on the ground that the victim was a somewhat urgent walk at the time of the accident in this case.

Furthermore, in light of the defendant's occupation and place of accident, the defendant's negligence cannot be deemed to be less severe, the degree of injury caused by the accident in this case, the defendant and the victim did not have any separate agreement between the defendant and the victim, and all of the sentencing data recorded in the records of this case, such as

arrow