logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2020.11.26 2019노3114
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주치상)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles);

A. The instant traffic accident was a very minor accident that caused the Defendant’s vehicle to be lightly contacted the victim’s vehicle behind the accident, and the victim did not appeal to the traffic certificate, even if the victim was found to have been injured immediately after the accident.

Therefore, it cannot be said that victims suffered injuries to the extent that it is necessary to take relief measures at the time.

(b) immediately after the accident, the vehicle refers to the front left side of the vehicle, and the victim had the phone number and the vehicle number less, and the victim had the accident completed well to take photographs, and not escape from the site.

2. Determination

A. In light of the legislative intent of Article 5-3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “Special Crimes Act”) and the legal interest and protection thereof, in a case where it is not deemed necessary to take measures under Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding and abetting the victim, the accident driver does not take measures such as aiding and abetting the victim, and even if leaving the place of the accident, it does not constitute a violation of Article 5-3(1) of the Special Cases Act.

However, whether there was a need to take measures such as aiding and abetting the victim should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the details and details of the accident, the age and degree of the victim’s injury, and the circumstances after the accident. However, in order to recognize that Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act grants a person who caused the accident an emergency responsibility for providing relief to the person who caused the accident, there was no need to take measures such as aiding and abetting the victim, the victim actively expressed that it is unnecessary to take relief measures.

(2) there is no need to take any other emergency action.

arrow