logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2015.05.29 2015도3976
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
Text

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Seoul Southern District Court Panel Division.

Reasons

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. As to the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Death or Injury caused by Dangerous Driving), the Defendant asserted that the Defendant was drunk at the time of the instant case, but did not have a difficult condition to drive normally, but this is merely disputing the fact-finding, which is the exclusive authority of the lower court

2.(a)

The court below found the defendant guilty on this part of the charges on the violation of the Road Traffic Act, considering the following facts: (i) the defendant strongly shocked the victim I's operation, which is in contact with India, due to the following: (ii) the above accident caused by the defendant: (iii) the glass view destroyed by the above accident is considerably damaged; (iv) the convenience view is scattered far away from the defendant's cargo loaded, as well as delivery; and (iv) the defendant has left the site without direct confirmation of the situation at the scene of the accident; (iii) it is recognized that the defendant at the time was in a situation where the defendant should take necessary measures to prevent and eliminate traffic hazards and obstacles and ensure safe and smooth flow of traffic.

B. However, we cannot agree with the above determination by the court below for the following reasons.

According to the evidence adopted by the lower court, the following facts are revealed: (a) the Defendant driving of cargo vehicles around 02:20 on January 16, 2014 at a speed of about 20 km from the two-lane roadways to the sidewalk and the vertical direction; (b) the Defendant damaged the exhauster of the above upper part of the entrance and the entrance connected to the upper part of the sidewalk, and the articles located at the upper part of the sidewalk; (c) the glass angle of the damaged entrance was scattered far from the front sidewalk and the loading of the above cargo; and (c) the victim I was absent from the scene at the time of the accident.

arrow