beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. In full view of the evidence presented by the prosecutor to the gist of the grounds for appeal, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the violation of the Road Traffic Act even though the defendant could have sufficiently been admitted as a crime.
2. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is as follows: “The Defendant is a person driving B rocketing car. The Defendant, at around 01:00 on February 6, 2015, 201, driven the said vehicle at a speed of about 60 km/h level depending on one lane as the front side of the draft three-lane distance, which is located in the area of the wife population at the permissible time, was dead at both sides. In such a case, a person engaging in driving service, has a duty of care to see the front left well, and drive safely while accurately operating the steering and steering the steering gear. Nevertheless, the Defendant, while neglecting this, had the central separation zone installed in the front section of the Defendant’s vehicle seat at the front part of the Defendant’s driver’s seat. Accordingly, the Defendant, at the time of leaving physical damage on the repair cost, left the front part of the repair cost and did not immediately stop the vehicle and did not take necessary measures.”
On the other hand, the court below punished the person who did not take the measure at the time of traffic accident under Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act.
However, the purpose of Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act is to prevent and eliminate traffic risks and obstacles on roads to ensure safe and smooth traffic, not to recover the physical damage of victims. In this case, measures to be taken by drivers at the site should be taken appropriately according to specific circumstances, such as the contents of the accident and the degree and degree of damage, and the degree of such measures ordinarily required in light of sound form.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Do2001, Jun. 28, 2002). In this case, the instant case is intended.