logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.08.17 2018노798
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The instant traffic accident was not caused by Defendant’s negligence.

At the time of the case, the pedestrian signal at the right side of the defendant's vehicle was green, and the above traffic accident was caused by the victim D's drinking and the signal violation.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The lower court’s determination as to the assertion of mistake of fact: (a) the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court; (b) there was no signal, etc. on the front side of the Defendant’s vehicle driving direction; and therefore, in order for the Defendant to enter the middle distance, the pedestrian signal on the right side of the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle ought to be green, with due care; (b) however, at the time when the Defendant’s vehicle and the vehicle enter the middle distance, the pedestrian signal on the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle was not green; (c) while proceeding in accordance with the victim’s direct rash, it appears that the victim’s rash was in conflict with the Defendant’s vehicle that entered the middle distance (the victim’s lab and the signal on the direct lab change with the main yellow signal) and the Defendant’s vehicle that entered the middle distance; and (d) the victim was normally driving due to the influence of drinking at the time

In full view of the fact that the instant traffic accident does not seem to have occurred due to the Defendant’s negligence, it is reasonable to see that the instant traffic accident occurred due to the Defendant’s negligence.

The above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

3. Although the defendant is aged to determine the unfair argument of sentencing, while the defendant was in the fourth degree of disability, the defendant was absent from the accident site without taking all measures such as rescue and relief despite causing traffic accidents, the degree of injury of the victims is not easy, and the defendant subscribed to liability insurance only to the victims.

arrow