logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.11.16 2020고단5162
교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the person who is engaged in the operation of B Costaex and in the operation of B Costaex.

At around 03:55 on May 16, 2020, the Defendant driven the above van, leading to moving it to the front of the said cafeteria at the parking lot near the cafeteria located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

At the time, vehicles are proceeding on the side where the defendant intends to take a back, so in such a case, the driver of the vehicle has a duty of care to reduce speed and check the right and the right and the right and the right and the right of the driver and to check the direction of the driver, and to check closely whether there is a vehicle driving in the direction of the driver's moving, and to prevent the accident in advance.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and neglected to stop in the direction of the Defendant’s proceeding, and received the part on the right side of the victim E (E, South, 63 years old) who was standing in the direction of the Defendant’s proceeding.

Accordingly, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as salt, tension, etc. in need of treatment for about one week due to such occupational negligence.

2. The judgment of the court below is the case falling under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, and Article 268 of the Criminal Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.

According to the agreement bound by the records and the results of the sentencing investigation of this court, the victim may recognize the fact that he/she has withdrawn his/her wish to punish the defendant on October 26, 2020, after the prosecution of this case was instituted.

3. In conclusion, 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