logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.06.28 2019노1447
교통사고처리특례법위반(치사)
Text

1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for eight months;

3.Provided, That it shall be for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (under 8 months) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. We also examine the arguments of the Defendant and the Prosecutor.

This case is limited to the death of the victim who has dried the crosswalk, and the result is significant, and the crime is not bad.

However, it is recognized that the defendant's family members want to commit the crime of this case, especially the fact that the defendant's family members want to take care of the defendant's life in custody for about two months after being detained in the court below, especially the time for the defendant to take care of the defendant's life in custody, after the decision of the court below was rendered, the victim's family members agreed to pay 20 million won to the victim's bereaved family members. The above bereaved family members do not want punishment of the defendant, the vehicle operated by the defendant is covered by comprehensive insurance, the victim's family members want to take care of the pedestrian red signal, and the victim's family members want to take care of the defendant's wife, the economic situation of the defendant,

In addition, considering various circumstances such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, the punishment sentenced by the court below is somewhat inappropriate.

3. The judgment below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act as the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the following judgment is rendered again after pleading.

(3) Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that “In a case where the original judgment is accepted by the Defendant and the original judgment is reversed, the prosecutor’s appeal shall not be dismissed separately from the original judgment).” The gist of facts constituting an offense and evidence is identical to that of the original judgment. As such, the gist of facts constituting an offense and evidence

The application of legislation;

arrow