beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,500,000.
If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of a D-port cargo vehicle.
On March 5, 2013, the Defendant driven the above vehicle on March 11:03, 2013, and led to the right-hand of the Cheongju-dong Cheongju-dong Cheongju-dong to the view-to-face of the audience in the Heungung-dong.
In such cases, when a pedestrian passes a crosswalk by reducing speed for a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle, taking into account his/her front side and right side well, he/she has a duty of care to temporarily stop in front of the crosswalk to check the safety of pedestrians, and to prevent the accident in advance.
Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and makes it a right-hand.
On the side of the CU convenience, pedestrians E (the age of 24) crossing the crosswalk to the pedestrian signal was shocked to the front side of the Defendant’s driver’s operation, leading the victim to the surface.
As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim E by negligence in the course of performing the above duties for about two weeks, and even if he did not take necessary measures such as relief measures against the victim, the Defendant escaped.
Summary of Evidence
1. Each legal statement of witness E and F;
1. Each police statement of E and F;
1. A general medical certificate;
1. Application of statutes governing field photographs and CCTV images;
1. Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning the relevant criminal facts and the Act on Special Cases concerning the Selection, etc. of Specific Crimes;
1. Articles 53 and 55(1)6 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (see the following reasons for sentencing):
1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;
1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that there was no criminal intent for escape since the defendant did not recognize the occurrence of a traffic accident itself, as to the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.
However, according to each evidence of the judgment, the evidence is ①.