logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2012.12.18 2012노1409
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,500,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant: (b) immediately after the accident occurred, the Defendant asked the victim D to ask the victim F to see that 10 minutes of time or more; and (c) asked the Defendant’s father G, who was the father of the Defendant, to get off the victim D’s cell phone because the Defendant’s cell phone was set off; and (d) requested the victim G to get off the scene of the accident; (c) 50 meters away from the scene of the accident for filling; (d) while G left the scene of the accident, even though the Defendant did not intentionally leave the scene of the accident, he was guilty of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Dok Vehicle); (d) the violation of the Road Traffic Act (unclaimed Measures after the accident) and misunderstanding of legal principles.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is under the influence of alcohol around 00:23, Sept. 18, 201, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle of 0.147% of blood alcohol level, and runs three-lanes of the four-lane road in front of the “on the face of the modern car car,” located in the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon, with the view of flooding through the flooding slope.

At the time, at night and at the front of the driver's vehicle, the victim D is driving in the front of the driver's vehicle, so the driver of the vehicle has a duty of care to keep the front door well and prevent the accident in advance by maintaining the safety distance with the front vehicle.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, while neglecting the remaining under the influence of alcohol, was negligent in proceeding with the Defendant’s driver’s vehicle in front of the victim’s driver’s vehicle.

Ultimately, the Defendant, by the above occupational negligence, suffered from the victim F, who was accompanied by the victim D and the victim D driving taxi for about two weeks of care, respectively, and at the same time, suffered from the climatic salt requiring approximately two weeks of medical treatment.

arrow