beta
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2019.05.02 2018고단1010

화물자동차운수사업법위반

Text

Defendant

A A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1.5 million, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1.5 million.

Defendant

A above.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A (26 years old, South) is a driver of a private-use truck, and the defendant B is a corporation with the owner of the above vehicle.

No private-use truck shall be provided for a fee in transport of cargo.

1. At around 11:00 on July 1, 2018, Defendant A used C’s private-use truck at a point of 369.2km-do, Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-do, Hongcheon-do, Hongcheon-do, Chungcheongnam-do, and received approximately KRW 400,000 as the price by towing the victim D(24 years of age, south)’s E-Wurg vehicle standing due to a single accident, and approximately 2.8 km.

Accordingly, it was offered to cargo transport for consideration by using private-use trucks.

2. Defendant A, an employee of Defendant B, violated the duty of the corporation as described in paragraph 1.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ partial statement

1. A protocol concerning partial investigation of the suspect against the defendant A;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Statement of the police statement regarding D (including attached materials);

1. Part of the police statement concerning F;

1. The Defendants asserts to the effect that: (a) KRW 400,000 received from D is not money paid for towing expenses; (b) KRW 500,000 from Defendant B was not paid for towing expenses; and (c) Defendant B was not charged for the work of separating Aburged vehicles and private-use trucks.

However, in full view of the evidence presented in the judgment, the following circumstances are revealed: ① Defendant A, who has towed a hurged vehicle with the first truck for private use, merely intended to tow D free of charge, and did not thereafter hold that the cost of separation of the vehicle and the private-use truck will be claimed in KRW 400,000; ② Defendant A stated to the effect that Defendant A has entered a 5-metric vehicle without the prior consent of D; ③ the receipt issued by Defendant B representative director F to D, the vehicle check and the fare.