A substitute surnamed Wen, who holds bachelor's degrees in journalism and business management from National Chengchi University, was riding a multi-service taxi on the Provincial Highway 64 Expressway on January 25 this year. The driver Lin Yujun threw the taxi and was run over by four cars and died tragically. Lin Yujun investigated During the investigation, he denied dragging the victim out of the car. The National Judge of the New Taipei District Court found that he knew that the victim was unable to save himself at the time, but still dragged the victim out of the car and threw the bag, causing the death of the victim. Today, Lin Yujun was sentenced to 13 years in prison for the crime of abandonment causing death. He can appeal.
This case occurred on January 25 last year. After visiting friends in Section 2, Xinglong Road, Wenshan District, Taipei City, a 25-year-old man called a car through the Bolt ride-hailing platform to meet him at his residence in Banqiao. However, the driver threw his bag and died on Highway 64 Expressway.
The collegial court found that at around 2:07 a.m. on January 25, Lin Yujun, after accepting Wen's ride order on the Bolt app, drove to Lane 301, Section 2, Xinglong Road, to pick up Wen and headed to Changjiang Road, Banqiao District, New Taipei City.
The collegial panel found that Lin had an obligation to protect Wen and needed to provide him with a safe place to get off the bus. However, when passing Provincial Highway 64 to the Banqiao ramp, Wen suddenly fell down in the back seat. Lin knew that Wen was incapable of saving himself, but he still got off the car at about 2:19 in the morning. 27.5 kilometers west of Provincial Highway 64 in Zhonghe District, New Taipei City (toward Banqiao), the driver stopped at the road line and soundproof wall, opened the driver's rear door and dragged Xing Wen out of the car. He saw him lying on the road at the rear of the car and drove away immediately.
After the incident, although he called 110 to ask the police to check, he lied about "driving by" and disguised himself as a bystander. When the police called back, Lin said he was the driver and continued to lie, saying that the victim got out of the car by himself. During the police inquiry and investigation, Lin continued to deny dragging the victim out of the car and used words such as "get out of the car by yourself, please get off." It was not until the trial that he confessed that he had lied and that he had pulled the victim's coat.
During the trial, Mr. Lin only admitted to the crime of negligent death, but claimed that the result of the death of the deceased was not causally related to his actions. The victim's family said that Mr. Lin's criminal method was "cold-blooded intentional homicide" and denounced him as unscrupulous and devilish.
The collegial court held that although the defendant took the initiative to call the police to inform the police that the victim was lying on the expressway, he did not admit that he was driving the taxi that carried the victim. After learning that the victim was dead, although he took the initiative to explain to the police station, he still stated several times that the victim "got out of the car on his own initiative" and did not actively report to the investigative agency the main act or fact of "abandonment".
The collegial panel held that it was difficult to objectively identify any special reasons, circumstances, and circumstances that caused the loss of the victim's young life as a result of Lin's crime, but that it was enough to arouse general sympathy and appear to be forgivable. It recognized that even the statutory minimum sentence was too severe, so the sentence could not be commuted in accordance with Article 59 of the Criminal Law.
The National Judge's Court will consider the defendant's motive and purpose for committing the crime, the stimulation he received when committing the crime, the means of the crime, the relationship between the defendant and the victim, the damage caused by the crime in this case, and the living conditions of Lin Nan, who has two minor children, no previous criminal record, failure to reach mediation with the victim or During the reconciliation and trial, the defendant did not show sincere remorse after committing the crime. Considering the possibility of the defendant's return to society, the family appointed a lawyer team to consider that the specific request for a life sentence was too severe, and the prosecutor's specific request for 11 years was considered too light, etc., so he was sentenced to 13 years in prison.
