logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2018.07.12 2018고단376
교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a C-wing and cargo vehicle, in violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the Road Traffic Act;

On January 28, 2018, the Defendant driven the above cargo vehicle at around 17:50 and proceeded with a road of one-lane near the official distance in the official rith, in the flow of the road, if the road is located in the middle of the flow of the road at the creative location, the Defendant would be driving toward the front side of the death.

In this case, the driver of the motor vehicle had a duty of care to safely operate the steering system, and to safely operate the steering system in accordance with good faith by accurately manipulating the steering and steering system.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, while neglecting this, led the Defendant to the front part of the E-chip vehicle driven by the victim D while driving in front of the signal atmosphere without waiting the front door, and led the Defendant to the front part of the E-chip vehicle in front of the freight of the Defendant. As a result, the E-chip vehicle was pushed forward in the future and stopped in front of the vehicle, and the latter part of the E-chip vehicle driven by the victim F. (F., 28 years old) who was driven by the Defendant, was driving in front of the vehicle.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury to the said victim F by negligence in the course of performing the above duties, such as salt panion, which requires approximately two weeks of medical treatment, and at the same time damaged the said low-speed car owned by the victim H by approximately KRW 836,207.

2. The Defendant violated the Guarantee of Automobile Compensation for Damages, who owned the above wing and freight cars, operated the automobile which was not covered by mandatory insurance at the above time and place as above.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A survey report on actual conditions;

1. A written diagnosis and written estimate;

1. On-site photographs of traffic accidents;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes regarding mandatory insurance;

1. Criminal facts;

arrow