logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.10.27 2016고단3755
교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five million won.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one million won shall be the one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On March 3, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 4 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) in the Seo-gu District Court’s branch branch on March 3, 2016, and is still pending in the appellate trial.

On June 19, 2012, the Defendant issued a summary order of one million won as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Daegu District Court, and on May 22, 2014, the Defendant violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, who was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for the same crime in the same court on June, 2014.

【Criminal Facts】

1. On July 24, 2016, the Defendant driven C-to-be under the influence of alcohol content of at least 0.051% without obtaining a motorcycle driver’s license from the front side of the Seo-gu Seo-gu Seompon Large Singu, Seo-gu, Daegu to the front side of the construction site of the same Singu building B, Jung-gu, Seoul, the Defendant driven C-to-be under the influence of alcohol content of 0.051% without obtaining a motorcycle driver’s license.

2. The Defendant violated the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Bodily Injury) was driven by the above Oral Ba while under the influence of alcohol on the date stated in the above paragraph (1) and led the three-lane roads in front of the construction site of the Daegu Jung-gu Building B to proceed along two-lanes from the nearest distance to the Taepon distance.

At the time, the Defendant was proceeding along with the E-A-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn-Wn, so, the Defendant had a duty of care to drive safely by considering the movement of the preceding vehicle in front time and securing a sufficient safety distance at the same time.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and proceeded as it was due to the negligence of the Defendant, and received the part behind the right part of the said vehicle from the front part of the said Obane.

Ultimately, the Defendant’s occupational negligence, such as salt, tension, etc., in which the victim needs to receive approximately two weeks of treatment.

arrow