logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.08 2015고합258
교통사고처리특례법위반
Text

The defendant shall disclose the summary of the judgment of innocence against the defendant.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a person who drives a DNA-free taxi.

On October 3, 2014, the Defendant driven the above taxi on October 3, 2013:50, while driving the 103 ambling post office distance in the Gwanak-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu along the two-lanes of the third ambling road from the ambling distance to the Silung-dong.

At night, the front door was an intersection where signal was installed, so a person engaged in driving a motor vehicle has a duty of care to safely stop the front door to the front line and prevent the accident in advance, starting from the point of view of green signal to the inside of the stop line when the front door signal is red.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and stopped above the stop line and stopped on the crosswalk, and without properly examining the front and rear left side, caused the death of the victim E (the age of 26) who was driving on the front side of the F CB400 Obaon driven by the victim E (the age of 26) due to the occupational negligence from the start side of the motor vehicle due to the violation of the vehicle stop signal, resulting in the death of the victim due to the prolonged long-term damage, etc. at the Solar Hospital in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Seoul on October 3, 2014 by shocking the front side of the fB400 Obaon driven by the victim E (the age of 26).

2. The defendant's assertion that the defendant stopped in violation of the stop line, and the green signal starts before it turns on. However, there is no causal relationship between the negligence of the stop line and the accident of this case, and the negligence of the stop line and the accident of this case, ② in the case of the departure of the ship, the defendant cannot be deemed to be negligent in the course of business, and ③ even if the departure of the ship is recognized as the defendant's occupational negligence, there is no causal relationship between the

3. Determination

A. The results of the examination of evidence, such as the examination of witness during the trial process, the reproduction of video images, and documentary evidence investigation, are examined.

arrow