logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2016.06.08 2015고단2677
교통사고처리특례법위반등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. The Defendant in violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the Road Traffic Act is a person who is engaged in driving of a bareboat cargo vehicle.

On June 9, 2015, the Defendant driven the above cargo vehicles around 00:28, and proceeded ahead of the street flusing bridge in the luminous Manyang-si, from the home flusing-distance flooding plane to the light flusing plane.

At night, she is placed at night, and she is installed at the center, so in such a case, the driver has a duty of care to see the front and left well so as not to drive in the station beyond the central line, and to accurately manipulate the steering and brakes so as not to prevent accidents from occurring.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and was negligent in driving beyond the median line and received the front part of the victim D(53 S) drive in the front direction of the Defendant, which was at the front direction of the Defendant’s running line, as the same part of the Defendant’s driving cargo vehicle.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as the left-hand slotr pulverization, which requires approximately eight weeks of treatment due to such occupational negligence, and at the same time damaged the victim to have approximately KRW 4,292,737 of repair cost, such as the exchange of the front-hander of the damaged vehicle.

2. The Defendant, in violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Compensation for Damages, is the owner of a cargo-to-face.

Despite the fact that a motor vehicle not covered by mandatory insurance is prohibited from operating on the road, the defendant operated the above cargo vehicle which is not covered by mandatory insurance at the same time and place as above.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. A traffic accident report (1 deemed), a actual investigation report, and a traffic accident report;

1. Photographs related to the traffic accident scene;

1. Inquiry into mandatory insurance (1), (2);

1. A medical certificate;

1. Application of the written estimate statutes;

1. Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the proviso to Article 3(2)2 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts.

arrow