logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2019.05.30 2019고단95
교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

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

On November 1, 2018, at around 07:45, the Defendant proceeded along the front road of Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, with one-lane one-lane one way from the Myeonpo-ri side of Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, to the front road of Hongcheon-gun.

Since the place was a narrow road in one lane, in such a case, the driver had the duty of care to prevent accidents from smoke and safely drive the steering gear and brakes by accurately manipulating the steering room and the steering gear.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected to do so and led the victim D (the age of 61) who was driven in the front section of the vehicle operated by the victim D(the age of 61) due to the negligence of the defendant, was shocked with the front part of the vehicle of the defendant.

Ultimately, due to the above occupational negligence, approximately KRW 2,681,094, such as the exchange of back-ferers, damaged the victim’s vehicle to the extent that the repair cost is sufficient, and at the same time, damaged the victim’s base base, tensions, etc., and damaged the victim’s chills, tensions, tensions, etc., which require approximately 2 weeks of treatment, and damaged the F (F) who was accompanied by the victim’s vehicle for about 64 years of treatment.

2. No owner of an automobile in violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act shall operate any automobile on a road which is not covered by mandatory insurance;

Nevertheless, the Defendant operated B Poter Cargo Vehicles, which are owned by the Defendant and did not have mandatory insurance at the same time and place as in the preceding paragraph.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the police interrogation of the accused;

1. Written statements of D;

1. The application of the Act and subordinate statutes on Babbbbling and video CDs as a result of inquiries into the failure to subscribe to mandatory insurance, such as a fact-finding report, on-site photographs, estimates, and medical certificates;

1. Each relevant Article of the Act concerning criminal facts;

arrow