logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2015.07.09 2015고단1402
교통사고처리특례법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person engaging in driving a rocketing taxi.

On May 25, 2015, the Defendant driven the above taxi at around 22:30 on May 25, 2015, and tried to move back the taxi from the tent Park to the protection of the astronomical market at the front distance of the Incheon Elementary School located in 266, Gangdong-gu, Gangdong-gu, Seoul.

On the front side of the defendant's moving direction, there was a crosswalk without signal lights, so the driver of the motor vehicle had a duty of care to safely stop the accident after checking whether there is a pedestrian who gets on the front side of the motor vehicle.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and did not discover the victim C (at the age of 57) who was standing a crosswalk from the right side of the defendant's proceeding to the left side, and did not discover the victim C (at the age of 57) and shocked the victim's left side side by the front part of the above taxi operated by the defendant.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim through occupational negligence above, such as the left-hand slots that need to be treated for about eight weeks, and the Defendant suffered injury such as fladrop in half-months on the outer side.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. C’s statement;

1. A traffic accident report;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Application of statutes on field photographs and vehicle photographs;

1. Article 3 (1), the proviso to Article 3 (2) and Article 3 (6) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents concerning Criminal Facts, Article 268 of the Criminal Act;

1. Determination of punishment for the instant traffic accident, the victim’s injury caused by the instant traffic accident is not less severe, and the instant accident is not also likely to have been committed in violation of the proviso of Article 3(2)6 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents. However, the Defendant did not have any record of being punished for violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents since 200, and the instant taxi is subscribed to mutual aid under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2)1 of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

arrow