logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.06.22 2017고단1151
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주치상)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who is engaged in the operation of MW10W 108CC 108.

On February 26, 2017, the Defendant driven the upper 00:50, the lower court proceeded with a single lane of the fourth 4 lane in front of the 363 North Korean office building distance in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, with a water basin from both sides to a water basin.

At this point, since it is an intersection where signal lights are installed, there was a duty of care for a person engaged in off-to-land driving service to drive safely in accordance with the signals.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and neglected to proceed with the vehicle driving signal while being red, and the victim D (34 Q 125 Q 124 U.S.) driven by the victim D (34) who was driving from the surface of the shooting distance of the mine to the long-distance flooding area in accordance with the Mamast Jin New, the side part of the EM125CC 124 U.S. is front of the Defendant's Oral part.

Ultimately, the Defendant, due to the above occupational negligence, sustained injury to the victim, such as cutting off the left-hand pelle, which requires medical treatment for about six weeks, and at the same time destroyed the above UM125 Qub to repair cost of KRW 1,038,000, and escaped without taking measures such as aiding the damaged person.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to F and G;

1. A written statement of the occurrence of each traffic accident of H and D;

1. A survey report on actual conditions;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Application of the written estimate statutes;

1. The defendant alleged that he/she had no criminal intent to flee (the defendant had no criminal intent to flee) under Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, Articles 148 and 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act regarding criminal facts. However, according to the above evidence, the defendant left the site without taking any measures for the victim's relief, but returned to the site only after the lapse of 30 minutes after the accident occurred after the victim was rescued by the 119 first aid unit. Thus, the defendant's intention is recognized.

arrow