logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 목포지원 2013.10.25 2013고단1376
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(위험운전치사상)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date of the final judgment.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Death or Injury caused by Dangerous Driving) is a person engaged in driving a B rocketing car;

On August 12, 2013, the Defendant driven the said car with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.132% at around 14:16, while under the influence of alcohol, and led to the flow of the said car into the boom-gu Hampon road in Pyeongtaek-gun, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-do from the grost of the white streets distance to the blapon-Eup location.

At all times, there is a duty of care to prevent accidents by emphasizing the front side and accurately manipulating the steering and brake system in the case of the defendant who is engaged in driving of the motor vehicle as a one-lane road in which the center line of yellow solid lines is installed.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, under the influence of alcohol, was able to drive in a state where normal driving is difficult, and the part on the left side of the DNA driving vehicle driven by the victim C (hereinafter referred to as 60 years old) who was driving in the opposite direction due to the negligent negligence over the center line was shocked by the Defendant’s left side of the vehicle.

As a result, the Defendant suffered from the injury to the victim E (V, 54 years old) who was accompanied by the above victim C and C’s vehicle due to occupational negligence, such as salt, tension, etc. in need of two weeks of treatment.

2. A violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) was driven by the Defendant under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of about 0.132% from the 10km section from the front of a restaurant to the roads of the same mar-Eup in the same mar-Eup, regardless of whether the Defendant was in the front of a restaurant, if the Defendant was at the same time, such as paragraph (1) of this Article.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. A report on detection of a host driver, and a report on the de facto statement of a host driver;

1. Each written diagnosis for C and E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on accident-related photographs;

1. Article 5-11 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes as to the crime in question, and Article 148-2 of the Road Traffic Act.

arrow