logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2016.01.21 2015노505
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the degree of shock at the time of the accident that caused the accident, the victim's behavior after the accident, etc., the victim suffered from the accident in the instant case where he had been in need of two weeks of medical treatment.

It is difficult to see, even if not,

Even if the victim complained of suffering from the accident or did not appear to have any physical or mental signs after the accident, and the victim was not aware of the fact that the victim was injured by the accident, so there was a criminal intent to escape from the defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of five million won) is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding the facts, in light of the legislative intent of the provision on the aggravated punishment of drivers of escape vehicles under Article 5-3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and its legal interests, it was necessary to take measures under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding and abetting the victims of the accident in fact.

If it is not recognized, the driver of the accident shall not take measures, such as aiding the victim, but leave the place of the accident.

In light of the fact that Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act imposes an emergency relief liability on a person who caused an accident, it does not need to take measures, such as aiding and abetting the victim, in light of the fact that Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act imposes an emergency relief liability on the person who caused the accident. In light of the fact that Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act imposes an emergency relief liability on the person who caused the accident.

In order to recognize it, it should be objectively and clearly expressed that relief measures are unnecessary on the part of the victim, or that there is no need to take other emergency measures, at the time immediately after the accident.

arrow