2010 Gohap243 Doz. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Do parking)

(Quantities) Violation of the Aggravated Punishment Act, etc. of Specific Crimes

Violence, etc., Violation of the Road Traffic Act (Measures Not to be Taken after Accidents), road bridge

Violation of the law of traffic (driving)

A

Maintenance smoke

Attorney B

December 17, 2010

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Provided, That the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final.

The defendant is ordered to attend 40 hours of community service and compliance driving lecture for 80 hours.The murder charge in the facts charged in this case is acquitted.

Criminal History Office

Defendant,

1. On June 26, 2010, at around 21:30, the victim E (50 years of age) who was a proxy driver to take a Franchisa car operated by the victim E (50 years of age) to take the front of the defendant's office located in the Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, Seoyang-si, the driver of the vehicle operating the said car on the road at a point 34 km away from the Seoul metropolitan cycle Highway located outside the Seoul Metropolitan Highway located in the Namyang-si at the southyang-si, the driver of the vehicle who was operating the said car on the road at a point 34 km away from the Southern Metropolitan Highway located in the Namyang-si, the Hayang-si, the driver of the vehicle who was taking the victim's head by taking the victim's head k;

2. At around 23:34 on the same day, a driver is driving the said car along one lane for a road of 510-16 Cheonggu-dong, Seoul Special Metropolitan City along the right edge of the Cheonggu-dong. At night, its location is at night and its center line is installed at the right edge of the Cheonggu-dong, so a driver is obliged to thoroughly drive the front city and safely safely to prevent an accident while driving the said car, despite his duty of care to prevent an accident, the driver is negligent in driving the center line while driving the said car at 23:34 on the same day, while driving the said car at 3:5 Hagu-dong, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and driving the said car at 1:7 Hagu-dong, the left edge part of the Hagu-dong 5 Hagu-dong 5 Hagu-dong 51 Hagu-dong 7 Hagu-dong 30 Hagu-dong 9 Hagu-dong 200 Hagu-dong 30 1).

3. On June 26, 2010, around 22:02, at the 34 km away from the 01:48 km away from the 34 km away from the day off from the 01:6.27 June 27, 2010, a driver driven a F Sochip car with a blood alcohol content of 0.143% under the influence of alcohol at the speed of 0.143% from the day off which the 34 km away from the day off of the Seoul Urban Highway

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police officer's statement of K, L, I, and G;

1. Each investigation report (Evidence No. 207 pages, No. 477 pages, of evidence);

1. A survey report on actual condition (No. 401 pages of evidentiary records), a report on occurrence of a traffic accident (No. 406 pages of evidentiary records);

1. A report on detection of a host driver and a medical certificate for G;

1. Written estimate;

1. Inquiry into the enemy;

1. The application of suspect body photographs, body photographs, body photographs of the suspect, photographs related to accidents, and Acts and subordinate statutes on site photographs of the suspect;

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

(a) The point of assault by a driver: Article 5-10 (1) b of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes; Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes; Article 268 of the Criminal Act

(c) An occupation of a measure to be taken after destroying or damaging each object: Articles 148 and 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act;

(d) point of a drunk driving: Subparagraph 1 of Article 148-2 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act;

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes between the crimes of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the crimes of violation of the Road Traffic Act (unnecessary Measures after Accidents), and punishment for the crimes of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes of which punishment is heavier)

1. Selection of punishment;

The punishment of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, a violation of the Road Traffic Act, a violation of the Road Traffic Act, or a violation of the Road Traffic Act shall be selected.

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes with the punishment prescribed for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, which is the largest penalty provided for in the former part

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (General Conditions favorable to the defendant among the reasons for sentencing below)

1. Order for community service and education;

Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

Judgment on the argument of the defendant and defense counsel

1. Summary of the assertion

At the time of each of the crimes in this case, the Defendant was in a state of mental or physical disability due to drinking.

2. Determination

According to the records, even though the defendant was aware that he had drinking alcohol at the time of committing each of the crimes in this case, the defendant called an insurance company with a vehicle gas falling from the 2th of the Olympic Games around 00:36 on June 27, 2010 and charged gas to the defendant. After that, in light of the circumstances before and after committing each of the crimes, such as the fact that he directly driven the vehicle and returned home to the country located in the one-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-si, the defendant cannot be deemed to have reached

The reason for sentencing is that the defendant, after assaulting a proxy driving officer, has inflicted an injury on the victim by causing a traffic accident while driving under the influence of alcohol on his/her own, and the crime is not good in light of the fact that he/she gets involved in a traffic accident while driving under the influence of alcohol by him/her, scambling the central line, and escaped again.

However, if the defendant is the first offender, the victims of the traffic accident who wanted the defendant's wife, the victim who is a substitute driver, died of the victim who is his/her bereaved family member, but agreed smoothly to the spouse of the victim, the victim of the traffic accident, and the compensation for physical damage is made for the vehicle involved in the accident without any significant degree of injury to the victim of the traffic accident, and the defendant separates and reflects his/her mistake, etc., and all other sentencing conditions specified in the public trial, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, family relation, etc., shall be sentenced to the same punishment as the order.

Parts of innocence

1. Summary of the facts charged

around 21:30 on June 26, 2010, the Defendant: (a) reported the victim’s head to the police station on his cell phone; (b) sought to assault the victim’s right-hand side of the vehicle by changing the victim’s head to the front part of the vehicle with a speed of 34km; (c) she gets the victim to take the victim’s head knife; (d) her head knife the victim’s head knife; and (e) her head knife the victim’s head knife the victim’s head knife; (d) the victim continued to stop on the side; (e) the victim’s head knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knif; and (e) the victim’s.

2. Summary of the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion

The defendant, while making a mistake in the operation of a water motive in a state where he was unable to exercise due care due to drinking, was involved in an accident that causes the victim in the vicinity of the dives of vehicles and the dives of the dives of the vehicles and the dives of the vehicles and the dives of the vehicles

3. Determination

(a) Facts of recognition;

The following facts are acknowledged according to the defendant's partial statement, part of the witness M's legal statement, each police's statement of M, the result of the on-site inspection of this court, the fact inquiry of the Seoul Highway Non-Amsan Business Office, and the fact inquiry of modern automobiles, according to each request for appraisal by the National Scientific Investigation Agency:

(1) On June 26, 2010, the Defendant: (a) 21:14, at the Guri-si Dari-si Dari-si Dari-si Dandong-si Do, the Defendant was a substitute driver E, who was a substitute driver, carrying the victim E, and he was on the back seat of his FJa-si Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong, and the Defendant was on the back seat. (b) At around 21:30 on the same day, the Defendant reported the victim’s Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong 34 km-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong Do-dong.

(3) The body of the deceased victim is in a separate shape, and the body of the victim was exposed to the lower body, and the victim suffered from crym bryms and cages, etc., and the victim's non-inspection report on the victim's body may conflict with the vehicle by moving the body in the front direction after the crym damage. Damage observed by the crym crym, including the crym brym, is the body of the victim, and the victim is likely to suffer damage in the state of kids between the vehicle and the road, considering vehicle or surrounding circumstances."

(4) The front side of the instant small or medium-sized car was destroyed, and the head car of the victim was shicked between the right side part of the right side, and the back side part was divided into inner side, and the victim’s hacker was detected, and the victim’s hacker’s hacker’s hacker’s hacker was exposed in even in the shape of the front and rear up part.

(5) The instant small-scale car is occupied only by Myanmar, etc. in the event that it took a backward part in the absence of Headlights, and only as soon as possible in the event that it takes a barc.

(6) The point where the victim died shall be the length of the road bended by a bend, which is about 900 meters away from the place where the driver stops in the instant small-scale car, and approximately 50 meters away from the stopping place of the instant small-scale car, the height of the car is about 117cm, and the driver of the vehicle can be seen as put put to put to place the place of death by a whiteer and a bitr at the stopping place.

(7) Around 22:03 on the same day, the Defendant driven the instant small-scale car, and passed through the U.S. 32-18 Sinyang-si Sinyang-si, Namyang-gu, Seoul, at the end of 23:34 on the same day, at the end of 23:34 on the same day, the Defendant paid two traffic accidents on two occasions, as stated in the facts of the offense in the judgment in the Southernnam-dong, Seoul Special Metropolitan City. On June 28, 2010, at the end of 01:47 on the same day, the Defendant arrived at the Defendant’s house located in Ilyang-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

(1) Legal statement

M in this Court, “The injured party avoided the assault of the Defendant and brought the Defendant at the vehicle, and the Defendant was frightened on the side of the vehicular road to see the victim’s death, and then lost the spirit of the latter. At the time, the vehicle was left behind at the time, and the distance between the vehicle and the victim was about 40 meters. The sound coming from the vehicle was not heard by the vehicle. This is the same as the one that was not shocked by the victim, but the mind was lost by that shock. At the time when the Defendant’s vehicle and the vehicle were shocked, the distance between the low and the victim was 1m.”

(2) The statement mar in an investigative agency showed that "the proxy engineer was 40 meters later from the direction towards the police, and left the side once every time while coming to the representative engineer. The Ra had continued to leave the side. The 10m degree is that the proxy engineer was sent by the signal, and that the light was seen as soon as possible, such as the ice, and that the ice was protruding, and it was expected that the luxur. At the same time, the representative engineer was walking on the side of the road, and he was able to walk up at the same time, and he was able to look back to the left side of the bar, and he was able to be informed of the fact that he was able to be forgotten by the police after being investigated by the 4rd witness. The same is applicable to the case where he was investigated by the police after being examined by the witness.

Criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial shall be proven by the prosecutor, and the judge should be convicted with evidence of probative value sufficient to confident that the facts charged are true. If there is no such evidence, M, the sole witness of the defendant, even if there is doubt of guilt, shall be judged as the interests of the defendant. As examined earlier, M, who is the only witness of the defendant, is unable to clearly state the facts he/she observed, and after being examined by the witness, he/she was given a statement that he/she was directly shocked on the part of the defendant, but did not directly shock his/her vehicle from the time of four times of investigation, and it is not consistent with the statement that he/she was not shocked by his/her own vehicle, but rather, it is difficult to readily find another motive for the defendant to kill the victim as soon as possible, such as the defendant stated that he/she was able to be able to kill the victim, at an interval of time after he/she lost his/her memory.

Therefore, it is insufficient to view that the testimony of the witness M or other evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone had the intent to kill the victim, and there is no other evidence to prove this otherwise, and thus, this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no evidence of crime, thereby not guilty under the latter part of Article 325

The presiding judge and the voluntary judge rules

Judges or the Korean Office

Judge Lee Jae-in