logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2016.06.02 2016노351
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. 항소 이유의 요지 이 사건 사고로 피해자는 허리를 삐끗 하여 그 통증으로 여러 차례 병원 치료를 받았으므로, 피해자는 일상생활을 하기 불편한 정도의 통증으로 인한 상해를 입었고, 이 사건 사고 후 피고인은 도로 교통법이 정한 교통사고 발생시 필요한 조치를 취하지도 않았다.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles that found the defendant not guilty.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is a person engaging in driving a Crane car.

On July 31, 2015, the Defendant driven the above car at around 06:51, and led to the right-hand of three-lanes between three-lanes from the parallel parallel parallel to the parallel parallel from the parallel parallel. The Defendant driven the above car to the parallel parallel of three-lanes.

Since there is a three-distance intersection, the defendant, who intends to enter the intersection bypassing, had a duty of care to prevent accidents by entering the intersection in advance, if there is no vehicle due to the fact that there is a vehicle going through the intersection and the left and right of the road.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and entered the intersection without examining the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the part of the victim D(34 ) driving, which is going to the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and

Ultimately, the Defendant, due to the above occupational negligence, sustained injury to the victim, such as salt, tensions, etc. in need of approximately two weeks of medical treatment, and, at the same time, escaped without taking necessary measures such as aiding and abetting the damaged party, even though the repair cost of KRW 409,935, such as the exchange of the preceding panions, was destroyed to the extent that the said strawing car was destroyed to the degree of 409,935

B. The Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes is applicable.

arrow