logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.10.19 2017노999
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주치상)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The instant accident is not caused by the Defendant’s occupational negligence, but caused by the Defendant’s occupational negligence, even if the Defendant was not aware that the Defendant was negligent in his occupational negligence at the time of the instant accident, and the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles and thereby finding the Defendant guilty of the instant charges, even though the Defendant did not have any intentional escape due to the Defendant’s failure to recognize that the accident was caused by the Defendant’s occupational negligence, on the part of the Defendant’s domestic affairs, even though it was caused by the Defendant’s negligence, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact and misapprehending the legal principles, thereby finding the Defendant guilty of the instant charges.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (two years of suspended sentence for eight months of imprisonment, two years of community service order, 120 hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, on the following grounds, the Defendant committed occupational negligence in which the Defendant was frightened with the central line of red-frighting, thereby proceeding to the inside of the intersection beyond the stop line. There is a considerable relation between the Defendant’s occupational negligence and the instant accident, and the Defendant intentionally escaped from the scene of the instant accident even if the Defendant had failed to do so.

Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the court below was guilty of the facts charged in this case, and there is no error of misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles.

1) According to the defendant's occupational negligence and considerable person between the defendant's accident and the accident in this case, the defendant's accident in this case occurred according to the victim's investigative agency and the court below's legal statement, internal investigation report (the reporter and witness's statement).

arrow