logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.08.23 2013고단1668
교통사고처리특례법위반
Text

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving buses C.

On June 12, 2012, the Defendant operated the above bus around 18:40 on June 12, 2012, and changed the bus from Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu, Seocho-gu, Seoul to the first line in order to drive the front road of the 741 National Cemetery of Seocho-gu, Seoul to the 20km away from the area of the Seoul Seoul Seoul Seoul Arts Center, along the two-lanes, at the 20km away from the area of the Seoul Arts Center, the Defendant changed the bus from the point where the U.S. is not allowed to move to the opposite line.

In such cases, a person engaged in driving service of a motor vehicle with a large radius, such as a bus, has a duty of care to prevent accidents by changing the bus line through a good examination of the front, rear, and left and right.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and did not discover the E-to-beb that is driven by the victim D (year 71) who was driven by one lane on the rear side of the Defendant's bus and went beyond the above O-to-beb on the left side of the Defendant's bus.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused bodily injury to the victim D due to the above occupational negligence by causing bodily injury to the victim D, such as cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral cerebral ties, which requires more than three months of medical treatment.

2. The instant accident involving the Defendant’s change of address is proceeding by driving the safety zone where the victim is prohibited from entering, on the surface of the earth.

Since the defendant's bus that changes the bus line has broken down and the defendant cannot be said to have a duty of care to drive the bus considering the traffic offense of the victim, it cannot be recognized that the defendant violated the duty of care to drive the bus in relation to the occurrence of the accident of this case.

3. Determination

(a) A driver of a vehicle passing by a safety zone, in spite of the display of a safety zone, unless there are circumstances in which the crossing of the vehicle was specifically permitted, shall operate in the vicinity of the vehicle.

arrow