logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2015.05.28 2012도9697
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)
Text

The appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

"A case where a driver of an accident runs away without taking measures under Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding a victim, etc." under Article 5-3 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter referred to as the "Special Crimes Act") means a case where the driver of an accident runs away from the accident site before performing his/her duty under Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding a victim, although he/she knows that the victim was killed or wounded due to an accident, causing un

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. In such a case, the measures to be taken by a driver should be appropriately taken according to the specific circumstances, such as the content of the accident and the degree of damage, and the degree of such measures is to the extent ordinarily required in light of sound form, and such measures shall include information about the identity of the driver involved in the traffic accident such as the victim or the police officer.

However, Article 5-3 (1) of the above Aggravated Punishment Act is enacted to protect the public interest of traffic safety and to protect the personal legal interests of the victims of traffic accidents by taking into account the possibility of a strong ethical criticism in the act of the drivers who have caused traffic accidents without taking measures, such as aiding the victims of the accidents, in reality that a sound and reasonable traffic order corresponding to the rapid increase in automobiles and traffic accidents has not been established.

arrow