(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.04.26 2016노6815 | 리걸엔진

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) 수원지방법원 2017.04.26 2016노6815

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The fact that the Defendant, by mistake of fact, conflicted with the damaged vehicle, and the fact that the victim F suffered injury is recognized.

However, at the time of the above collision, the defendant did not conflict with each other and caused the vehicle to slickly.

I think that it was returned to the home, and that it was not a escape without recognizing the above accident.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that recognized the defendant's criminal intent to flee is erroneous as a fact-finding.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (an amount of five million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances are revealed by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of fact: ① A damaged vehicle stops immediately after the occurrence of an accident while working on an emergency, etc.; ② The fact that it is confirmed that the damaged vehicle stopped immediately after the accident, and ② the damaged vehicle driven the damaged vehicle.

D immediately after the accident, the Defendant started to stop for a short time and started again.

In light of the fact that: (a) the same content was confirmed in the black image of the damaged vehicle; (b) the Defendant confirmed that the damaged vehicle stopped immediately after the accident; (c) the Defendant: (d) the Defendant’s neck box installed on the Defendant’s vehicle recognized the “scambling” and the accident at the time of the accident; and (c) the Defendant did not recognize the accident itself at the time of the accident, in light of the damaged vehicle’s damaged part and degree of the damage.

It is difficult to do so.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion that the defendant did not have the intention of escape is without merit.

B. As to the unfair argument of sentencing, there is no particular criminal history against the defendant since the defendant was punished for drinking driving in 2002.

The Defendant agreed with the victims.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2018.10.26 2018노1963

-의정부지방법원 2016.06.02 2016노377

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.12.21 2018노2360

-대전지방법원 2017.08.24 2016노3776

-창원지방법원 2020.09.24 2020노140