logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.12.13 2017노2212
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(위험운전치상)등
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal, the court below held that the defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact that the defendant sustained injury from the victims due to occupational negligence while driving a motor vehicle in a difficult condition while under the influence of alcohol, but the court below cannot be deemed to have held that the defendant was driving the motor vehicle, and even if the defendant did not constitute a crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (harm resulting from dangerous driving), the court below acquitted the defendant of all the charges of this case, even though it can be punished for ordinary occupational injury and bodily injury.

2. Determination

A. The summary of this part of the facts charged is a person who is engaged in driving a vehicle of DSS5.

Although it is difficult for the Defendant to drive the said car normally while under the influence of alcohol 0.126% in blood around November 22, 2016, the Defendant entered the said car from the parking lot in Gwangju Northern-gu, Gwangju Northern-gu, 98-1 to the non-laned two lanes in front of the said parking lot.

At that time, the Defendant had a duty of care to safely drive a vehicle by avoiding a vehicle driving on a road because the Defendant entered the road with frequent access of the vehicle.

Nevertheless, under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant continued to enter the road by neglecting such duty of care and driving the road on the roadside, while driving the road on the left side of the direction, the Defendant did not avoid the FST5 car driving in the driving of the victim E (MM54 years old). The Defendant was able to receive a part of the back gate of the FM5 car driving in the front part of the DM5 car.

Ultimately, while the Defendant was driving a car in a difficult condition while under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant is on the part of the victim E due to the above occupational negligence.

arrow