logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 공주지원 2016.05.13 2015고정91
도로교통법위반(사고후미조치)
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is engaged in the duty of driving Cone Star 6 Track Cargo Vehicles.

On August 31, 2015, the defendant operated the above-mentioned vehicle on August 19, 2015, and directly proceeded with the 36th national highways from the Cheongyang-gun to the Cheongyang-gun's settlement side.

At the time, the accident site was difficult, and the vehicle line is narrow from the two lanes to the one lane, and the right side of the road was installed with a PE protection wall due to road construction.

In such cases, a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle shall accurately operate the steering system, brakes, and other devices of the motor vehicle, shall not drive the motor vehicle at a speed or in such a manner as to inflict any danger and injury on others according to the traffic conditions of the road and the structure and performance of the motor vehicle, and has the duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by reporting the traffic situation well and safely.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and neglected it and caused the collision of the right side of the road PE protection wall on the right side of the victim, and caused the collision to the opposite side of the road PE protection wall, thereby leaving the accident site without taking any measure, even though the victim D (22 3,00,000 won, which was driven by the victim D (1,179,134 won in front of the right side of the ES protection wall that was driven by the victim D (22 ,00) who was driven by the victim D, which was driven by the victim D (1,179,134 won in repair cost so that the PE protection wall may conflict, and the non-products away from the accident road 29 years, which were driven by the victim F (29 years) of the victim F.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. Statements made by witnesses D in the second public trial records;

1. A report on the occurrence of a traffic accident and a report on actual condition investigation;

1. Written estimate;

1. On-site photographs and black stuff CDs (the defendant and defense counsel did not require follow-up measures because the defendant and defense counsel did not produce non-products due to traffic accidents at the time;

Since it is argued that goods are caused by traffic, such as health zone and driving of vehicles.

arrow