logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.01.31 2018노3273
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주치상)등
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the event of a mistake of facts, there is no evidence that Defendant A had a direct contact with the victim at the time of the traffic accident at the time of the accident at issue of mistake of facts, and Defendant A was driving a car as it is because it was not aware of the fact of the accident at issue, not having escaped with the knowledge of the occurrence of the accident and damage. Defendant A’s car was covered by a comprehensive insurance, and

Defendant

B had made a false statement to the police as to the actual driver at the time of the instant traffic accident, but as such, the instant traffic accident was not recognized, it did not intend to have the Defendant A, an offender, escape.

Therefore, since the Defendants did not have intention to commit each of the crimes in this case, the facts charged in this case against the Defendants should be pronounced not guilty. However, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendants guilty of all of the facts charged in this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles, or by misapprehending the legal principles

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment, six months of imprisonment, and two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendants asserts that all the Defendants were unaware of the occurrence of the instant accident at the time of the instant traffic accident.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., (i) at the time of the instant case, Defendant A driving a white C low-speed car, driving the two-lane road in front of the Suwon Police Station in the direction of the large-speed zone, and (ii) Defendant A changed the vehicle from the first lane to the second lane, and (iii) Defendant A changed the victim E’s left part of the victim E, who was driving on the two-lane, while driving the vehicle from the two-lane to the two-lane, led the victim to go beyond the ground on the right side of the said vehicle. As a result, the victim was at the time.

arrow