logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2015.08.21 2015노9
교통사고처리특례법위반
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. According to the testimony, etc. of F by the investigating police officer of this case, although the defendant could recognize the fact that he entered the intersection of red signal and caused an accident due to the violation of signal, the judgment of the court below which sentenced the dismissal of prosecution against the facts charged of this case on the ground that it is difficult to deem that the defendant passed the signal, etc. of red signal, etc., is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion

2. Determination

A. The gist of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a person engaging in driving of CPoter freight vehicles.

On November 27, 2013, the Defendant driven the above vehicle on the 07:40 on November 27, 2013, and led to the direction of the 3rd intersection in the Goyang-gu Goyangyang-gu Goyangyang-gu, Goyang-gu.

Since there is an intersection where signal lights are installed, a person engaged in driving service has a duty of care to reduce speed and drive safely according to good faith.

Nevertheless, without neglecting this, the victim D(61) who enters the intersection and turn to the left from the left side of the moving direction due to the negligence of entering the intersection, disregarding that the vehicle progress signal is changed to a stop signal, was driven by the back side of the cargo vehicle by the defendant.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as finite dynasium, which requires approximately two weeks of medical treatment by occupational negligence as above.

B. The lower court determined that: (a) although the traffic signal in the direction of the victim’s vehicle at the time of the instant accident is deemed to have been a green signal for the left-hand turn and the traffic signal in the direction of the defendant’s vehicle, the traffic signal is deemed to have been a red signal; (b) there is a bus stop at the intersection in the direction of the defendant’s vehicle, there is a stop line at a distance far away from the latter; and (c) the traffic signal is installed immediately on the front of the said crosswalk; and

arrow