logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.07.21 2016노957
도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was unaware of the shocking that Defendant’s taxi was the victim on board.

Therefore, there was an intention of escape.

Therefore, the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the violation of the Road Traffic Act (unnecessary measures after the accident) is not established.

B. Even if the defendant's intention to flee is recognized, the victim suffered bodily injury.

subsection (b) of this section.

2. Determination

A. According to the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to whether the defendant had an intention to flee, the defendant can be found to have committed a traffic accident as stated in the judgment below, and the fact that the victim escaped with the knowledge of the fact that the traffic accident occurred due to the above traffic accident.

① According to a photograph taken by cutting a black stuff image installed on Defendant’s taxi, the Defendant did not stop front of the crosswalk even though the signal, etc. for the vehicle installed on the crosswalk was red, while driving along a one-lane at the seat of the entrance area in the enclosed basin in Seoul, and did not stop in front of the crosswalk, and the Defendant shocked the rear wheels of the bicycle on which the victim was a driver of the crosswalk while driving.

② After witnessing the instant traffic accident, F of the original trial witness, reported it to the police. “In the first instance, F of the original trial, intending to turn on the left-hand direction, etc. after shocking the bicycles on which Defendant driver taxi was on board, and set up the direction to the left-hand direction, etc. at the front of the location where the accident occurred, but entered the vehicle of the first one.

In this regard, F has stopped by driving off the cab driving by driving off the sib.

At that time, the Defendant testified as follows: “I would like to see why the Defendant would prevent the Defendant from driving, and that F would not have to take any measure if the Defendant got a person,” and “I would like to have a great shock, and the victim’s bicycle wheels was the degree to which the victim’s bicycle wheels was displayed.”

F. The police investigation is conducted.

arrow