logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.03.20 2014고단9293
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six 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

The Defendant is a person engaging in driving a passenger car in the event E sports E20.

1. Around 03:50 on August 17, 2014, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (e.g., after-accident), driving the said car, and driving the first line of the FF in Seoul, Gangnam-gu along the speed from the edge of the fF to the edge of the fF hotel hotel shooting.

At the time, it was night and a place, so in such a case, there was a duty of care to reduce the speed to a person engaged in driving a motor vehicle and to prevent the accident in advance by safely driving another motor vehicle on the front side.

Nevertheless, while neglecting this, the Defendant neglected to stop in the front-down city, and did not discover HK5 cab which was driven by G while parked in the front of the Defendant’s course, and received the left-hand part of the said cab with the front-hand part of the said benz car.

Ultimately, the Defendant destroyed the above K5-si owned by the victim new taxi company due to the above occupational negligence and escaped from the site without any measure even though it damages the repair cost of KRW 624,298.

2. The Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) was making a stop on the nearby roads in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government I while escaping from an accident after having paid the accident at the time and place set forth in paragraph 1.

Accordingly, the victim was able to set the driver's seat towards the driver's seat of the car E20 that the defendant is driving, and the defendant was able to get off the car.

In such cases, there was a duty of care to safely operate a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle so that the victim in the side of the motor vehicle is not injured.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and went away from the site as soon as possible.

arrow