logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2021.01.08 2020고단4479
교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a Bran vehicle.

1. Violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Bodily Injury) and the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act by driving the said car around 18:20 on August 9, 2020, the Defendant changed the lane to two lanes at a speed of about 5 km per hour, where the DN-distance E restaurant located in Daejeon Dong-gu Daejeon is stopped in front of the DN-based E restaurant from the direction of the NN-distance to DN-distance direction.

In this case, there was a duty of care to give advance notice of change of course to a person engaged in driving a motor vehicle by operating a direction, etc., and to prevent accidents by entering the front line and the right side line after well living well.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and caused the Defendant’s negligence to change the tea line into the two-lanes of the same direction, and caused the victim F(F, 35 years of age) who is proceeding along the two-lanes of the same direction, thereby falling into the front gate part of the G-sea F (F, 35 years of age), which the Defendant drives.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the injury to the victim F, such as salt, tensions, etc. in the height of the above line, which requires approximately two weeks of treatment, due to the above occupational negligence, to the victim H (WWW) who is the passenger of the said vehicle, for approximately fourteen weeks of treatment, and at the same time damaged the front gate of the above sea macker by the repair cost of KRW 9,741,70.

2. The Defendant violated the Guarantee of Automobile Damage Compensation Act: (a) the Defendant operated the franchising car that did not purchase the automobile mandatory insurance at approximately 1 km section from the first road of the Daejeon-gu Daejeon Special Metropolitan City to the DN distance in the same Gu C from the first road of the same Gu.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written statement;

1. A traffic accident report (1) (2) (2)

1. Each written diagnosis;

1. A written estimate (the Defendant is calculated in excess of the cost of repairing damaged vehicles).

arrow