Hit 11-Year-Old and Claimed "Didn't Know"... Decisive Evidence Uncovered

An elderly driver in his 80s, who denied hitting an elementary school student in a school zone, has been handed a suspended prison sentence after being found guilty based on accident footage captured by his vehicle's dashcam.

The 1st Criminal Division of the Jeonju Branch of the Gwangju High Court (Presiding Judge Jeong Moon-kyung) announced today (August 24) that it dismissed the appeals filed by both the prosecution and the defendant, upholding the lower court's ruling of 10 months in prison suspended for two years for Defendant A (84), who was indicted on charges of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hit-and-run resulting in injury and injury in a child protection zone).

Defendant A was indicted for hitting B (11), who was crossing a pedestrian crosswalk in front of an elementary school in Jeongeup, Jeollabuk-do, at 3:39 PM on May 29 of last year, with his car and fleeing the scene without taking rescue measures.

He submitted a medical certificate to investigative authorities stating that his corrected visual acuity was "0.3 on the right eye and 0.03 on the left eye," and adamantly denied the crime, claiming, "I did not know I hit child B with my car."

However, there was a fact that Defendant A overlooked.

Because his car's dashcam had a feature that automatically saves video when an impact is detected, the accident footage remained intact even after the incident.

At the time, Defendant A came to a sudden halt after striking child B, and his wife, who was in the car, appeared to realize the accident as she rolled down the window and asked, "Are you hurt, kid?"

The first-instance court delivered a guilty verdict based on this dashcam footage and an accident investigation report from the Korea Road Traffic Authority, but Defendant A appealed the ruling.

The appellate court pointed out, "Looking at the dashcam footage, the part of the vehicle that impacted the victim was the front left bumper area where the driver's seat is located," adding, "Given that the impact was strong enough to cause the pedestrian to bounce off, the collision would have been sufficiently perceptible through senses other than sight, such as vehicle vibration or impact sounds."

The court further stated, "The victim was 11 years old at the time and suffered considerable impact from the accident, so the defendant should have taken measures such as taking the victim to the hospital or contacting their parents," and concluded, "Upon re-examination, it is difficult to see that the lower court's judgment was erroneous or that the sentence exceeded the reasonable bounds of judicial discretion."
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.