(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2014.06.20 2013노1302

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) 서울서부지방법원 2014.06.20 2013노1302

도로교통법위반(음주운전)등

Text

1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of two years and six months;

3.(a)

The defendant is an applicant for compensation.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The crime Nos. 1 through 21 of the crime list of this case of mistake of facts was committed by the defendant due to the actual traffic accident, and the defendant was under normal treatment at the hospital, and was not intentionally paid a traffic accident. In particular, the crime Nos. 1, 4, 8, 9, 9, 14, 16, and 18 was committed even though it was not against others, and it was caused by the accident that the defendant was under actual control.

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

2. An ex officio decision is made by the prosecutor, and when the prosecutor was in the trial, the column of the date and time of deception No. 8 in the annexed list of crimes in the indictment of this case is " around December 12, 2007," and the column of deception No. 9 is " around January 22, 2008," and the column of deception No. 10 is " around January 22, 2008," and the date and time of deception No. 10 is " around 03:15, Feb. 4, 2008," and the same is different from the object of the trial by this court. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court.

3. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the crime of this case Nos. 1 and 3 and 21 of the annexed crime list among the charged facts of this case can be acknowledged as having the defendant receive the insurance by pretending that the accident was committed, although the defendant intentionally faced with the vehicle and caused the accident, or had the vehicle actually faced with the vehicle.

B. However, among the facts charged in the instant case, it is insufficient to recognize that the crime No. 2 of the attached list No. 1 of the crime was committed by the Defendant on purpose in the vehicle driven by AV only with the entries of the materials submitted by the interesting country such as the completion of the contract, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

C. Therefore, among the facts charged in the instant case, the crime No. 2 is committed in the annexed Table No. 2.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2013.12.19 2013노2224

-대구지방법원 2020.08.14 2020노204

-서울남부지방법원 2013.08.23 2013고단2017

-수원지방법원 2020.10.26 2020노4075

-광주지방법원 2020.08.12 2018노3793