logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.06.03 2020고정241
교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)등
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The Defendant in the facts charged is a person engaging in driving a car at the horse set B.

On October 18:16, 2019, the Defendant driven the above car and changed the lane to four-lanes while driving the road of five-lanes in front of the zone C in the Suwon city from the front side of the ice-Jak-si to the front side of the Sejong Underground Road.

In this case, a person engaged in driving service of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to make a change of course by operating direction direction, etc. and give prior notice of change of course, and to make a change of the vehicle line in the situation of the front and rear.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and caused the victim D(22 years of age)'s E-motor vehicle driving in the four-lane due to the negligence of changing the vehicle vehicle into the four-lane as it is, the defendant shocked the victim's e-motor vehicle driving to the right-hand panion on the right-hand side of the horse-side car of the defendant.

Ultimately, the Defendant, by such occupational negligence, damaged the victim D, the victim F (20 years of age), and G (22 years of age), respectively, with approximately two weeks of medical treatment, and damaged the victim H (21 years of age) by causing about two- weeks of medical treatment, and at the same time damaged the 1,410,000 won of the repair cost of the franchis.

2. The determination of this is an offense falling under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and Article 151 of the Road Traffic Act, and shall not be prosecuted against the express will of the victim under the main sentence of Article 3(2)

However, according to the records, the victims may recognize the fact that they expressed their wish not to punish the defendant after the prosecution of this case was instituted.

Therefore, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow