beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.
Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
The defendant is a person who drives a CF station or another car on duty.
1. On May 8, 2014, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act driving the above vehicle on or around 11:05, and driving along the five-lane road of the upstream line of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Police Highway along the distribution direction from the Seocho-gu IIC bank to the fourth-lane.
The lanes have changed to the three-lanes.
In such cases, the driver has a duty to inform the direction change in advance and to prevent accidents by safely changing the lanes in the direction of the direction and the situation of traffic on the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right are well considered.
Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and neglected to change the course to the left-hand side by the negligence of changing the course to the three-lane of the rash in the same direction, and caused the rash vehicle driven by D (hereinafter referred to as 32 years old) to be rapidly operated in order to avoid the collision, and the rash part of the rash vehicle operated by F (44 years old) normally straight along the three-lanes of the rash truck vehicle, which was driven by F (44 years old), which was normally straight along the three-lanes of the rash truck vehicle, has the back part of the rash vehicle, and the rash part was left to the right-hand side of the rash vehicle operated by the Defendant.
Ultimately, the Defendant caused the above traffic accident, thereby causing damage that requires repair equivalent to approximately KRW 3,796,998 on the rash truck owned by the victim’s character capital Korea Co., Ltd., and causing damage that requires repair equivalent to approximately KRW 1,235,000 on the rash truck truck vehicle owned by the victim’s limited liability company.
2. No motor vehicle which is not covered by mandatory insurance in violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act shall be operated on a road;
Nevertheless, the Defendant operated the said EF car without mandatory insurance at the time and place under the preceding paragraph.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. The defendant;