logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2016.05.18 2015고정1652
도로교통법위반(사고후미조치)
Text

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. Where the driver of any motor vehicle causes death or injury to any other person or damages goods due to traffic flow, such as driving of the motor vehicle, he/she shall immediately stop the motor vehicle and take necessary measures to provide assistance to casualties;

On September 14, 2015, at around 15:10, the Defendant driven Bchip XG car (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) and destroyed the repair cost of KRW 1,120,000,00 by taking the crypstones and cryp pents, etc. installed at the center of the road, by neglecting his/her duty at the front of the road, while driving from around 15:10 on September 14, 201 to driving at the near the upper part of the Ansan City, which is an industry that is located in the movement of the Ansan City at the upper part of the Ansan City.

Nevertheless, the defendant immediately stopped and did not take necessary measures and left the scene.

2. Determination

A. The purpose of Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act is to prevent and eliminate traffic risks and obstacles on the road, thereby ensuring safe and smooth traffic flow, and thus, it does not aim at restoring victims’ damage. In this case, measures to be taken by drivers are to be adequately taken according to the specific circumstances, such as the content of the accident and the degree of damage, and measures to the extent normally required in light of a sound form. Such measures are not necessarily required for the driver himself/herself, and are unlikely to take relief measures, etc. by a person under his/her control, or by another person first before leaving the site (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do1738, Oct. 11, 2007, etc.). (b) The following facts can be acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Act.

① The instant vehicle driven by Defendant was returned due to an accident indicated in the facts charged (hereinafter “instant accident”).

2. The Defendant was absent from the vehicle of this case and towing vehicles around the time.

arrow