beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for seven months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Around 10:45 on May 10, 2012, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle of c ice truck and proceeded along with a red pharmacy in front of the “three-four-four meters range” located in the west-Eup, Chungcheongnam-do. Since the location is a residential area where the passage of vehicles and pedestrians is frequent, a driver of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to check and drive the course safety by reducing speed and taking into account the right and the right and the right and the right and the right of the motor vehicle. However, a driver of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to ensure the safety of the course and to check and drive the motor vehicle in front of the course due to negligence in the course of his/her duties, but without any negligence, failed to stop the motor vehicle on the right side of the aforementioned cargo, and the said baby is in excess of the upper part of the above cargo, thereby making the victim go beyond the road floor, thereby causing injury to the victim, such as escape, and immediately stopping the vehicle without taking necessary measures.
Summary of Evidence
1. Court statement of the defendant (the second trial date);
1. Each police statement related to E, F, and G;
1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to survey reports, photographs, and diagnostic reports;
1. Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 268 of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment for a crime;
1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is as follows: (a) the Defendant was under the age of 1 and 55(1)3 of the Defendant, who was on board the road, due to the shocking of his her son, and was under the age of 55(1)3; (b) the Defendant was able to actively seek the victim’s injury during a period of 4 weeks since he was on board the road; and (c) the Defendant’s mother, who was under the age of 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act, was consistent with the defense that the her son was frightened from the investigative agency to the date of the first trial;