logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2014.10.23 2014고정1682
도로교통법위반
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is a person who is engaged in driving of BK5 automobiles.

On April 25, 2014, the Defendant driven the said car at around 14:00, while driving it on April 14, 2014, and driving the said car along the three-lane road in the middle of the Clock in the Clock in the Clock in the Clock in the Clock of Slock in the middle of the Clock and driving it in the opposite lane.

In such cases, the driver of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by safely wearing the motor vehicle in order not to obstruct the driving of the motor vehicle in the opposite part by reducing speed and by properly examining the right and the right of the motor vehicle.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and went to the long-distance distance from the right side of the said K5 car, which was going to the right side of the said K5 car, as it was due to the negligence of the U.S., the Defendant received the front part of the said K5 car from the right side of the said K5 car, and the part to be loaded back to the left side of the E Bankcschoft cargo vehicle owned by the victim D, which was parked adjacent to the road due to the shock, was left side of the said K5 car.

Ultimately, the Defendant damaged the above cargo vehicle to the extent that the repair cost of KRW 17,083,00, such as an attachment of loaded cargo due to the above occupational negligence.

2. The facts charged in this case are crimes falling under Article 151 of the Road Traffic Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim's express intent under the main sentence of Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents. According to a written agreement bound in the trial records, the victim D explicitly expresses his/her intention not to prosecute the defendant on September 26, 2014, which is after the prosecution of this case. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow