(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.09.01 2016노1297 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.09.01 2016노1297

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant's vehicle was in contact with pedestrians while the vehicle was operated by the defendant, and the defendant voluntarily stopped and stopped the vehicle and started the vehicle again with him, knowing the fact that the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement of the movement

Nevertheless, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the records, since the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone cannot be deemed to have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the court below acquitted the public prosecutor of the facts charged as to the same purport, and there is no error of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the public prosecutor.

(3) If the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition, as long as it is difficult to conclude that the injured party's injury solely due to the traffic accident of this case as stated in detail in the decision of the court below.

(However) However, it is obvious that “the part of the vehicle driver’s seat” in Section 12 of the judgment of the court below is a clerical error in the letter of “the part of the vehicle wheeler’s seat”, and thus, it shall be corrected in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.

참조조문

-교통사고처리 특례법

-형사소송규칙 제25조 제1항

-형사소송법 제364조 제4항

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2016.11.23 2016노3154

-수원지방법원 2021.01.13 2020노4614

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2014.04.22 2013고정2148

-수원지방법원 2015.07.15 2014노6516

-창원지방법원 2016.11.10 2016노894