logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.12.11 2020노3460
교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

Since the summary of the grounds for appeal (guilty facts and misapprehension of legal principles) was agreed with the victim before the judgment of the first instance court, the judgment of the court below which rendered a judgment of dismissal of prosecution against the defendant is erroneous or erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

2. In the crime of non-compliance with judgment, the expression of the victim's wish not to punish the defendant or suspect or withdrawal of the wishing to punish constitutes the act of litigation against the court or investigation agency as a passive litigation condition in the criminal procedure and thus, the victim's litigation capacity is recognized under the Criminal Procedure Act.

Litigation capacity under the Criminal Procedure Act refers to the ability of a party to a lawsuit to effectively conduct litigation, that is, the ability of a defendant or a suspect to understand his or her status and interest in his or her litigation and to defend accordingly.

The principle that there is a litigation capacity with mental capacity should be deemed the same in cases where a third party, such as a victim, conducts litigation.

(Supreme Court en banc Decision 2009Do6058 Decided November 19, 2009). In light of the above legal principles, even if the case was based on the health stand in the Defendant’s statement in this court, the victim was not present at the time of the agreement, and the victim was present at only the victim’s punishment F, and the agreement was prepared in the victim’s name. The victim’s punishment F was written in the victim’s name. The victim’s punishment F was written only as the observer, but the victim was told before the agreement was written, but it appears that the victim was not able to find consciousness of the victim even after the date of preparation of the agreement. In light of the above legal principles, the victim’s ability was not available at the time of the agreement, and the legal representative’s punishment was made.

arrow