(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.07.20 2016노1305 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.07.20 2016노1305

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등

Text

Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (the penalty of KRW 10 million) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) In the instant facts charged, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the charge of violating the Road Traffic Act (not taking measures after an accident) against B among the facts charged in the instant case. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The above sentence committed by the lower court against the Defendant is too uneased and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below on the assertion of misunderstanding the facts of prosecutor's mistake or misapprehension of the legal principles is recognized as the fact that the defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, was driving the driver's car and leaving the site without the withdrawal of any measure on the driver's gallon's license while driving the driver's car with the gallon's own gallon's license, but the defendant was found to have parked the driver's car with the above gallon's license; ② the driver's license was parked on the back side, ② the driver's license was operated after parking the driver's license with the above gallon's license, and ③ there was no evidence as to the fact that there was no product from the above gallon's license or there was no possibility for other people at the site to conceal the defendant's vehicle. In light of the above, although the defendant got a driver's license and left the site.

Even if it is true that the defendant caused danger and disability to traffic due to the above traffic accident.

It is difficult to see that there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and found the Defendant not guilty of violation of road traffic law due to the failure to take measures after the damage to the vehicle B among the facts charged against the Defendant.

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and its reasoning, the above judgment of the court below is just.

Therefore, the defendant is against the defendant.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2017.11.14 2017노2043

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2016.06.14 2016고정138

-춘천지방법원 속초지원 2017.08.30 2017고단186

-청주지방법원 2020.02.13 2019노1085

-수원지방법원 2015.08.21 2015노398