beta
Text
Defendant
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Fact-misunderstanding victim E puts his body into the vehicle driven by the Defendant at the time of the instant case, prevents the Defendant from leaving the view, and thus the Defendant’s driver’s vehicle was placed in the Indian seat, and there is no injury to the Defendant, and there is no relation between the Defendant’s act and the injury suffered by the victim.
B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 1.5 million) is too unreasonable.
2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the first instance court as to the assertion of factual mistake: (i) the victim has consistently stated the fact of damage from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court; and (ii) the description of the situation at the time is very specific, and thus, it cannot be deemed that he/she did not have experienced any fact; and (ii) it is difficult to act to interfere with the driver’s view by keeping the body with the driver’s seat in a vehicle in light of the empirical rule.
In light of the fact that P, after the vehicle driven by the Defendant was faced with the border of India, sent the scene of the accident to the effect that “the victim observed the situation after the vehicle driven by the Defendant was transferred, the victim was faced with the vehicle outside of the vehicle, was entering the victim’s two arms, and the bridge did not enter the seat of the driver” (the legal statement of the witness P) the victim submitted by the Defendant to an investigative agency, such as a re-proof photo (Evidence No. 98, 99 of the evidence record) submitted by the Defendant, etc. submitted by the Defendant to the investigative agency, it is difficult to believe the Defendant’s change that it was difficult for the victim to believe that the victim was putting the body into the vehicle driven by the Defendant at the time and prevented the Defendant’s view, if the person is driving the vehicle while a delivery, it may cause the danger of suffering from the vehicle by the victim, and such danger is dangerous.