logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.01.31 2018노1148
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주치상)
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The case of this case is remanded to the Goyang Branch of the District Court for the sole purpose of the High Court.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the court below acquitted the defendant on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, on the ground that it is difficult to deem that the defendant had a criminal intent to escape, despite the fact that the defendant escaped from the scene without any relief measures against traffic accidents and sufficient evidence to acknowledge the criminal intent to escape from the scene.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant in the facts charged in the instant case is a person driving Bchip car.

On May 30, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 16:47, the Yongsan-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Nowon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Nowon-gu Public Health Center Scam, 126 U.S. Along with a large number of people who walk, the Defendant neglected his duty to safely drive on the road, such as checking whether there is a pedestrian who walked before the intersection; (b) but did not discover that the victim C (here 12 years of age) was negligent in failing to confirm the signal while making a telephone call with his/her friendship with his/her relative and did not immediately cross the crosswalk without the signal signal; and (c) made the victim go beyond the road with the right body of the victim’s head who requires treatment for about three weeks; and (d) the victim was punished by fine, and sent the victim to the hospital, and did not take necessary measures, such as informing him/her of the contact at the scene, and did not leave the road.

B. (1) The lower court’s judgment: (a) acknowledged the facts as indicated in its reasoning; and (b) comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances revealed in the fact of recognition, the lower court did not take measures, such as aiding and abetting the victim after causing the instant traffic accident, even if the Defendant left the scene of the accident without contact with the victim or sending the victim to the hospital.

arrow