logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.12.12 2017고정1465
교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a person who is engaged in driving B-wheeled Ba.

On May 5, 2017, the Defendant driven the above Obama on the 20:14th of May, 2017, and driven the front road in front of the Seoul Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government at a visible speed, along the two-lane direction in the direction of the Tyang market.

At the time of night, it was difficult to see the front line because of the headlight of vehicles operated by the night, and the road was cut at a corner because the light rail construction was around, and due to the said construction, the vehicle was crossed out. In such a case, there was a duty of care to confirm whether there was a person who gets a path by reducing the speed and properly examining the upper left and right of the front line for the vehicle engaged in driving, and to properly operate the brake system in order to prevent accidents in advance.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and did not discover the victim D(55 years) and had the victim go beyond the ground on the front part of the above urbbal which the Defendant driven.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as double-duplicating, planting, closing, etc., which requires approximately six weeks of treatment.

2. Determination is an offense falling under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and is not charged against the victim’s express intent under the main sentence of Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.

In this regard, according to the written agreement bound in the trial records, the victim has withdrawn his/her wish to punish the defendant on October 11, 2017, which was after the prosecution of this case.

Accordingly, the public prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow