(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.06.28 2016노9142 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.06.28 2016노9142

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)

Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) After the occurrence of the instant accident, Defendant (1) had the victim withdrawn relief measures against the victim, but the victim refused to do so, and due to Russia who urged daily allowances, the victim would inevitably have to notify the victim’s children of the fact of the accident and have the victim report 119. Until the 119 emergency vehicle gets the victim to protect the victim, there was no intention to escape from the Defendant at the time of the instant crime.

(2) The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 5 million) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The circumstances that the lower court properly explained in its determination as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of fact, and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, G did not say that “The Defendant did not look at the victim until the 119 first-aid vehicle was cut off.”

The testimony was made (60 pages of the trial record) and the victim also are waiting for the defendant to wait until the 119 first-aid vehicle.

Lambling is likely to go back.

“I have no time to say it was.”

If the testimony was made (40 pages of the trial record) and the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below are sufficiently recognized, so the above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

B. The Defendant left the scene of the instant accident without taking relief measures against the victim, even though the instant accident caused by the Defendant’s determination as to the improper assertion of sentencing by the Defendant and the Prosecutor, suffered serious injury in need of 10 weeks of treatment.

In addition, the defendant denies and does not reflect the crime of this case.

However, the defendant paid 15 million won to the victim and agreed with the victim.

Although the defendant has several different types of criminal records, a fine of one million won is imposed on the violation of the Road Traffic Act in 1997.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2016.01.12 2015고단2534

-대전지방법원 2016.02.04 2015노2262

-춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2018.06.14 2017노496

-청주지방법원 2013.02.21 2012노1123

-수원지방법원 2019.09.06 2019노1671