logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.08.18 2016노1399
도로교통법위반(사고후미조치)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, after a traffic accident, went to a nearby toilet while waiting for an emergency call by phone calls from a siren Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “slicking”). The employee in charge of dealing with an accident was dispatched to the scene and towed the vehicle, and the Defendant confirmed that the vehicle was towed at the scene by telephone and returned to the scene, and returned to the scene and returned to the scene, and returned to the scene, and returned to the taxi.

Therefore, the Defendant left the scene of the accident because he not only took necessary measures immediately after the accident but also took a place in a locked toilet.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one million won penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, namely, the Defendant’s assertion that the instant traffic accident occurred around 00:00 on November 17, 2015, although the date and time of crime was written around 00:25 on November 17, 2015, according to the details of receipt of the emergency call by the call center (No. 18 pages of the trial record) submitted by the Defendant, the Defendant’s first receipt of the accident was around 00:01 on the same day, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion that the instant traffic accident occurred around 00:0 on the same day.

When driving a vehicle owned by a siren for diving, a locking bridge was scattered on the road that was destroyed by shocking the curbstone and steel pole installed in front of the crosswalk, and the steel pole was enclosed with the rear wheels of the vehicle, and ② the Defendant requested a dispatch on the ground of an late 00:01 on the same day after the accident, the vehicle owner, and the Han River Headquarters, the safety of the facility, and the manager of the steel pole.

arrow