"Could Not See Due to the Mound," Defendant Claims
Acquitted of Negligent Injury Charges
Court: "Negligence Cannot Be Judged by Accident Outcome Alone"
A man in his 40s who caused a four-week injury after colliding with another skier while snowboarding at a ski resort was acquitted again in the appellate court.
On the 23rd, the 2-1 Criminal Appeals Division of the Incheon District Court (Chief Judge Lee Suhwan) announced that it had delivered the same not guilty verdict as the first trial to Mr. A (46), who was charged with negligent injury. In January 2023, Mr. A was snowboarding on an intermediate course at a ski resort in the metropolitan area when he collided with another skier, Mr. B. At the time, Mr. A had descended to the middle point of the course, while Mr. B was stopped in the middle of the slope to pick up a mobile phone he had dropped on the snow while taking photos of an acquaintance. Mr. B collided heavily with Mr. A’s head, resulting in a fractured sternum and a diagnosis of a four-week injury.
The prosecution judged that Mr. A did not properly watch ahead and failed to control his speed, causing the accident, and filed a summary indictment with a fine for negligent injury in April of the same year. Claiming his innocence, Mr. A requested a formal trial, stating, "There was a mound just above the accident site, and I did not notice Mr. B, who was below the mound, until just before the collision." A friend who was snowboarding with Mr. A also testified in court, saying, "I was following right behind the defendant and thought he had fallen alone," and "I did not see the person below."
Ultimately, the first trial court acquitted Mr. A, stating that "Mr. B’s testimony is consistent with the defendant’s statement." The court ruled, "There is no evidence to suggest that the defendant was snowboarding at an excessively high speed or made a sudden maneuver." The prosecution immediately appealed, arguing, "Mr. A saw the victim while snowboarding down the slope and had enough distance to avoid the collision."
However, the appellate court also rejected the prosecution’s claims, stating, "Mr. A’s negligence was not proven beyond doubt." The court explained, "Unless the exact speed of Mr. A’s movement and the field of vision at the time of the collision are clearly established, it is not possible to assess Mr. A’s negligence based solely on the accident outcome," and added, "It is also quite possible that it was realistically impossible for Mr. A to safely avoid Mr. B just before the collision." Furthermore, the court noted, "The original trial directly examined witnesses and observed their demeanor to acknowledge the credibility of the testimony," and "There is no special circumstance to recognize that the original judgment was clearly wrong."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
