
高雄一名大貨車司機去年在左營區與小轎車輕微擦撞後駛離,被警方依肇事逃逸處以3000元罰鍰並吊扣駕照一個月。司機稱不知情,經高雄高等行政法院調查證據後,認定大貨車結構使震動難以傳導至車頭,無主觀逃逸故意,判決撤銷原處分。
AI-generated summary
司機曾稱事發當晚不知撞擊,事後主動聯絡對方並達成和解,但仍被警方依肇事逃逸處罰。
高雄一名大貨車司機去年行經左營區時與一輛轎車發生輕微擦撞後駛離,被警方依「肇事無人受傷未依規定處置逃逸」,開罰3000元並吊扣駕照1 個月。司機委屈喊冤聲稱「根本不知道有撞到」,案經法官調查大貨車結構與採證畫面後,認定大車的震動「難以傳導至車頭」,採信司機說法,判決撤銷原處分!
判決書指出,黃姓大貨車司機去年9月12日晚間9時許,駕駛營業大貨車行經高雄市左營區翠華路與華榮路口時,與一輛小轎車發生擦撞。事後小轎車後視鏡受損,警方認定司機肇事逃逸,由交通局依《道路交通管理處罰條例》裁處3000元罰鍰、吊扣駕駛執照1 個月,並須接受道路交通安全講習。
請繼續往下閱讀...
司機不服提起行政訴訟表示,事發當下正值深夜,他完全不知道有撞到對方的後視鏡。直到事後收到警方通知,他才驚覺發生事故,並立刻主動與對方聯絡,雙方也已順利達成和解,強調自己絕非故意逃逸。
高雄高等行政法院審理後,調閱現場採證影片與相關證據,發現兩車擦撞時的力道非常輕微。畫面中大貨車既沒有出現車身晃動或起伏,也沒有偏離原有的行駛路線,可見碰撞並未影響大車的行駛軌跡。
法官認為,大貨車屬於「車頭與車身非直接相連」的大型車輛,當車身與其他車輛發生輕微擦撞時,所產生的微弱震動,在物理上很難直接傳導到前方的車頭處。加上大型車輛對於碰撞力道的感知,遠不如車長較短的小型車敏銳,主觀上無逃逸故意 法院判決撤銷處分。可上訴。

India's Supreme Court declared recent Delhi-area rape cases a 'failure of law enforcement' as students protested demanding women's safety after a teenager was gang-raped.

This article explores how China can improve the quality and efficiency of foreign-related legal services, including optimizing the cross-border notarization process, improving the international commercial arbitration mechanism, and strengthening the connection between commercial mediation and justice, to provide legal protection for high-level opening up and the construction of the “One Belt, One Road” initiative.

Death row inmate Huang Linkai was executed by firing squad last year. The Alliance to Abolish the Death Penalty claimed that there were temporary sanctions and retrial procedures at that time, and filed an administrative lawsuit to challenge the Ministry of Justice's approval of the execution as illegal. The Supreme Administrative Court recently rejected the protest and the entire case was confirmed.

TikTok and its parent company ByteDance will pay the US state of Alabama $100 million and restrict children's use of the platform to reach a lawsuit settlement. This is the first time the platform has reached a settlement with a U.S. state to resolve child addiction allegations.

In response to a dispute over the gift of a house to half-sisters, the court revoked the gift and ordered the return of 340,000 yuan because the recipient had harmed the donor’s biological father. Lawyer He Haoyuan pointed out that the handling of property between relatives should be based on written contracts, and explained the applicable conditions for burdened gifts and civil law anti-filial piety clauses, and reminded that cash transactions need to retain written evidence to avoid the difficulty of proof.

A woman surnamed Zhao in Keelung City donated a house to her half-sister surnamed Xiong. Later, she filed a lawsuit to revoke the gift because Xiong and her father had a physical conflict and called the police. The Keelung District Court ruled that Xiong Nv had lost the case and had to transfer the right to dispose of the house to Zhao Nv and return 340,000 yuan, but rejected Zhao's request to return 100,000 yuan.