Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

The defendant is engaged in driving of B cargo vehicles.

On December 13, 2019, at around 09:44, the Defendant was driving 70 km at a 70km from the original bank of the mid-to long-term inland highway located in the 70-1 area in the scambari-ri-ri, Sungju-gun, Seongbuk-do.

No driver of any motor vehicle or tram shall use a mobile phone while driving any motor vehicle or tram except in cases where it stops, emergency motor vehicles are driven, or emergency cases where it is necessary to report various crimes or disasters, etc.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and used the mobile phone while driving as above.

Summary of Evidence

1. A criminal investigation report (in addition, details C of the investigation report);

1. Investigation report (the details of the current currency of a suspect) and investigation into details of the currency of a suspect;

1. Investigation report (to direct the prosecutor);

1. A penalty payment notification;

1. Control note;

1. The defendant asserts that the investigation report (as to the attachment of the statement of telephone, etc.) was citing a mobile phone for the purpose of geotension, and that there was no use of the mobile phone while driving.

However, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence, the defendant can fully recognize the fact that he/she used a mobile phone while driving the same as the facts charged.

Therefore, the defendant's argument cannot be accepted.

① At the time, the police officer in charge of the crackdownd 2 cargo vehicles continue to turn on the left-hand direction direction, etc., and look at low speed. The Defendant stated to the effect that the Defendant’s hand operated the cell phone into hand and boomed the cell phone while aground on hand.

② Since the police officer was seated at the top of the patrol police officer, and the Defendant was driving a cargo vehicle with a higher location than a passenger car, if the Defendant cited a mobile phone for the purpose of geotension as alleged by the Defendant, the police officer cannot view the mobile phone itself.