logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 정읍지원 2019.09.05 2019고단380
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주치상)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Reasons

(a)Article 54, paragraph 1, (a point of action to be taken after an accident), Article 152, subparagraph 1, and Article 43, of the Road Traffic Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (a punishment provided for in the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Crimes under the Road Traffic Act, and Crimes under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, which are more severe punishment);

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

1. Grounds for sentencing among concurrent crimes, for sentencing of Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2 and 50 (Aggravation of concurrent crimes within the scope of adding the long-term punishment of both crimes to the crimes of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, which are heavier than punishment) of the Criminal Act;

1. Scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines: The basic area of the escape after traffic accidents [type 1] and the basic area of the escape, from August to June of the imprisonment [in cases where illegality in the proviso to Article 3 (2) (excluding the proviso to Article 3 (2) (8) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents is heavy]] * The scope of the corrected recommended sentence according to the applicable sentencing guidelines: From January to June of the year (the lowest limit of the sentence recommended by the applicable sentencing guidelines is inconsistent with the statutory minimum limit of the applicable sentencing range, and thus the applicable sentencing range of the law is inconsistent with the applicable sentencing range);

2. The fact that the Defendant agreed to pay a considerable amount of money to the victim and that the health of the victim is not good is favorable to the Defendant.

Although the Defendant took a drug over the central line, considering the following: (a) the witness, the victim’s statement, and the Defendant, even without intentionally stopping the police officer’s phone calls, are able to take care of his wife while driving the vehicle; and (b) the Defendant sent the vehicle to only the police station and appeared at the police station after the mold, the Defendant appears to have driven the vehicle in drinking condition and left the scene.

The background of the accident, the extent of damage, the vehicle insurance is covered by G 1,00 driver, and the defendant.

arrow