(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.10.19 2017고단3369

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.10.19 2017고단3369

교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)

Text

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in the duty of driving Csi.

On May 3, 2017, the Defendant driven the above taxi on May 21:20, and proceeded along the four-lane road in front of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government along the new direction from the right side to the new road from the right side of the new direction, while making a right side to the private distance in the Gyeong-dong market, the Defendant, due to occupational negligence, who violated the duty of pedestrian protection in the crosswalk, caused the victim E (62 years old) who saw the crosswalk to the left side from the right side of the road to the right side of the Defendant’s course, suffered from the injury, such as the 3rd cage of the front part of the above taxi, which requires about four weeks medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the actual survey report, a statement on the occurrence of traffic accidents, and a medical certificate;

1. Relevant Article 3 (1) and the proviso to Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents Aggravated Punishment and Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is that the instant accident occurred due to negligence committed by the Defendant who neglected his duty of care in the crosswalk, the degree of injury suffered by the victim of the instant accident is not less than that of the victim, despite the fact that the Defendant did not reach an agreement with the victim, and that the Defendant had a record of punishment for the same kind of crime in the past, the Defendant reflects the fact of the instant crime, and the vehicle operated by the Defendant is insured by the mutual aid association, and the Defendant has no record of punishment in excess of the past.

참조조문

유사 판례

-서울북부지방법원 2017.04.20 2017고단626

-대구지방법원 2015.01.15 2014고단4919

-수원지방법원 2017.04.12 2016노6945

-춘천지방법원 영월지원 2017.03.28 2017고단17

-서울북부지방법원 2017.01.12 2016고단4172