logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.11.21 2018고정2032
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주치상)등
Text

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is those who are engaged in driving service of Bnib buses ( chartered buses and children’s school buses).

On August 31, 2018, the Defendant is driving a vehicle around 13:40 on a day, and is driving two-lanes in the direction of a three-way intersection in front of the Young-gu, Young-gu, and a three-lane distance from the luminous Range.

The course has changed into one lane.

In this case, there was a duty of care to inform the direction change in advance and to change the lanes safely by taking into account the traffic situation of the front and rear left.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and caused the change of the lane to the left side of the vehicle, and the victim D(42 years of age, South) driving in the same direction to the right side of the vehicle, which is the front side of the vehicle left side of the defendant's vehicle.

As a result, the victim suffered bodily injury, such as fluoral salt, etc. for about two weeks, and suffered about KRW 5,619,813 of the repair cost on the damaged vehicle, and immediately take necessary measures, such as providing relief to the injured, and went away from the site without taking any measures.

2. Determination

A. "A person who runs away without taking measures under Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding and abetting a victim" as provided by Article 5-3 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes refers to a case where the driver of an accident, despite the awareness that the victim was injured by an accident, leaving the scene of the accident before performing his/her duty under Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, such as aiding and abetting the victim, brings about a situation in which the identity of the person who caused the accident cannot be confirmed. Thus, in order for the crime of escape to be established, the result of the thought must arise, and it cannot be assessed as a "injury" under Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act.

arrow