logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2014.09.19 2014노498
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. According to the summary of the grounds of appeal by the victim D, witness F, and G, even though the Defendant did not take any measures despite the victim’s awareness that the victim was injured by an accident in the facts charged and escaped without being aware that the victim was damaged, the lower court rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecution on the ground that the Defendant violated the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, including the Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) and the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) was admitted to comprehensive insurance. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts

2. The facts charged in this case and the judgment of the court below

A. The Defendant charged with the instant charges is a person engaged in driving cars at Crewing.

On March 13, 2013, at around 02:10, the Defendant driven the above vehicle and changed the three-lane road in front of the KTT-distance from the south-gu, Ulsan-gu into the transformation station, and changed the two-lane to the two-lanes, depending on the direction of the substation.

At night, the above place is an intersection where vehicle traffic is frequent, and the U.S.ton is permitted only in one lane. In such cases, the driver of the motor vehicle has a duty of care to check whether there are other motor vehicles already in progress on the lane to enter, and to change the lane by operating direction direction in advance, and the driver of the motor vehicle has a duty of care to drive a U.S. on the designated lane.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected the above duty of care and changed the two lanes from the first lane to the second lane, and was negligent by the immediately internshiping at the second lane, and was in the middle distance of the transformation station.

arrow