(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2013.10.11 2012고단389

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2013.10.11 2012고단389

교통사고처리특례법위반

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be paid.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person engaged in the operation of buses C.

At around 10:00 on September 11, 201, the Defendant operated a bus and proceeded along the two-lanes of the two-lanes in front of the monthly sexual harassment road located on the monthly street in the Sinju-si in the Sinju-si.

In this case, the driver had a duty of care to safely drive the vehicle according to the vehicle signal by reducing speed and checking well the right and the right of the driver.

Nevertheless, due to negligence that the Defendant neglected the duty of the front line and proceeded as it was, the Defendant continued the said private distance from the jurisdiction of the head of the Si/Gu/Gu/Eup to the jurisdiction of the head of the Si/Gu (at the same time, there is no dispute over crossing the victim's vehicle; however, in relation to the direction of the victim's proceeding, it cannot be accurately known that the Defendant was unable to communicate with the victim in a state of serious injury, and it is difficult to ascertain whether the victim tried to proceed to a certain level between the gold-dong and the monthly balone) of the victim D(49 years old).

As a result, the Defendant caused the injury to the victim, such as traumad propopa, by negligence in the above business, resulting in the influence of the right side.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. Each legal statement of witness G and H in part;

1. Each protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Protocol of partial police statements concerning G;

1. Determination on the issues of each opinion

1. The defendant's defense counsel asserts that the defendant did not have violated the signal at the time of the accident in this case.

2. The judgment is based on the only direct evidence that the defendant has entered the intersection in contravention of the signal and that the defendant has entered the intersection at the time, G’s “place of the accident”, which is a director assigned to the site at the time.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2014.10.31 2014고단1825

-인천지방법원 2014.12.10 2014고단7741

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2017.07.14 2017고단1544

-서울동부지방법원 2019.10.11 2019고단2342

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2015.03.10 2014고단2226