logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 영동지원 2016.02.11 2015고정63
도로교통법위반등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On July 5, 2015, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act: (a) operated the CPA car volume around 19:00, while driving the national highway No. 4 near the top of the CPPA in the north-gun of the Chungcheongnamcheon-gun, Chungcheongnamcheon-gun, in Daejeon to the parallel of the two lanes north-gun, at the speed of the Si-high speed from Daejeon to the parallel of the two lanes; (b) changed the course to the speed of the Si-high speed.

At the time, there are many times, and there were other vehicles driving on the left side of the same direction.

In this case, a person engaged in driving service of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to check clearly whether it is likely to impede normal traffic of other motor vehicles running in the direction of change, and to prevent traffic accidents by changing course.

The Defendant neglected such duty of care and neglected the course of the vehicle, thereby resulting in the Defendant’s failure to change the course of the vehicle in front of the driver’s seat of the vehicle in front of the vehicle in front of the vehicle in front of the vehicle in front of the vehicle in front of the vehicle in front of the vehicle in the vehicle in front of the direction of D(38 Dose) (38 Dose) driving.

Defendant damaged 922,788 won of repair costs, such as 'H lamps (e.g., 922,788)’ by negligence in the course of performing the above duties.

2. Defendant 1 driven the CP car at the same time and at the same place as above 1, while under the influence of alcohol level of 0.092% in blood, Defendant 2 driven the CP car at the same time and place as above.

3. The Defendant violated the Guarantee of Automobile Compensation Act, at the same time and place as the foregoing paragraph 1, operated the CP car volume without mandatory insurance.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to D or F;

1. A survey report on actual condition and photographs on the scene of accidents;

1. A report on the detection of a primary driver and a report on the circumstances of the primary driver;

1. Inquiry into mandatory insurance;

1. Application of the written estimate statutes;

1. The relevant Act and the traffic law of choice of punishment concerning the facts constituting the crime;

arrow