logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.06.29 2015노6213
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant had no criminal intent to escape, and took relief measures suitable for the situation, and the victim’s injury cannot be deemed as “injury” under Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act on the ground that the victim’s injury is merely a minor injury.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 5 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The phrase “when the driver of an accident runs away without taking measures under Article 54(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes” under Article 5-3(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes refers to the case where the driver of an accident knows that the injured person was killed or injured due to the accident, such as providing relief to the injured person, resulting in a situation where it is impossible to confirm who caused the accident as to whether the injured person was dead or not (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do3441, Sept. 28, 2006). The intention of escape refers to the case where the driver of an accident denies the intention of escape on the grounds that the intention of escape was the first driver of the accident, and thus, it is inevitable to comprehensively determine the situation of the road at the time of the accident, the degree of injury to the injured person, the degree of relief measures to the injured person, the degree of injury to the driver of the accident, and whether the driver was injured or not.

2) In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant, without taking measures such as rescue of the victim after the instant accident, sufficiently recognized that he/she left the scene with the intention of escape.

(1) The victim in an investigative agency and the lower court stated that “The victim was in excess of the right-hand knee of the victim who walked along the crosswalk pursuant to the pedestrian signals.

The victim who the defendant intends to get off the vehicle.

arrow