logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2016.09.07 2016고단391
도로교통법위반(사고후미조치)
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the defendant does not pay a fine, one hundred thousand won shall be the day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On January 19, 2016, at around 01:53, the Defendant, while driving a c bargaining motor vehicle, was driving the said motor vehicle in front of the Sungnam-dong 111 square, Jinsu-dong, Suhyeong-dong, which was under the influence of the Defendant’s right bypassing the road from the center of the hack-dong to the aesthetic distance.

A driver of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to drive the motor vehicle more safely because he/she well sees the front left well, operates the steering gear accurately, and the road is slicked at the time, so the driver has a duty of care to drive it more safely.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and went away without stopping the vehicle immediately and without stopping the vehicle, even though the Defendant was able to get the 1,416,000 won of the repair cost after taking the 1,416,000 of the 1,416,00 of the 1,41, and 2,000 the 1,416,00 of the 1,000 the 20

Summary of Evidence

Defendant’s partial statement

The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a traffic accident report, on-site photograph of a traffic accident, CCTV image evidence and photographs, estimate of damage to trees, and a traffic sign estimate report (field status and witness statement).

1. Relevant Articles 148 and 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act and the choice of fines for criminal facts;

2. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the confinement of a workhouse.

3. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The gist of the assertion is that the Defendant left the scene due to the explosion of the vehicle after the occurrence of the accident. As the mother’s convenience store operated by the mother, contact with the insurance company and dealt with the accident, the Defendant did not have the intention of escape, and took necessary relief measures after the accident.

2. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence adopted and examined by the court below, the Defendant acknowledged that he left the scene of the accident without taking necessary measures after the occurrence of the accident, and the traffic accident is recognized.

arrow