logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.03.28 2018고단7598
교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The Defendant in the instant charges is a person engaged in driving B rocketing cars.

The Defendant, around 16:20 on October 11, 2018, operated the said car and brought it back to the entrance of the underground parking lot in front of the Heungung-gu C apartment D 3-4Ra, Young-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu, and brought it back to the E-section. As such, the Defendant was obliged to operate the vehicle with a duty of care to operate the vehicle in a safe manner by properly operating the operation of the operation and steering system and by properly examining the right and the right

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and got the victim's body part of the F (88 years old) of the victim F (the 88 years old) who walked on the D surface from the Mad E surface due to negligence, and got the victim to go beyond the ground.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury, such as 10 weeks of 10 weeks of the above occupational negligence, such as 10 weeks of flick aggregate, 4, 5, and 6 flick aggregate.

2. Public prosecution is a crime falling under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, which is a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, and Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and cannot be prosecuted against the express will of the victim under the main sentence of Article 3(2) of the same Act.

However, according to the criminal agreement submitted to this court on March 20, 2019, which was after the prosecution of this case, the victim expressed his/her intent that he/she would not want punishment against the defendant under the agreement with the defendant.

Thus, this case is applicable when the victim withdraws his/her wish to punish a case which cannot be prosecuted against the victim's explicit intent.

Therefore, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow