beta
(영문) 춘천지방법원 영월지원 2016.05.24 2015고정161

도로교통법위반(음주운전)등

Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of 6,00,000 won, and by a fine of 2,00,000,000 won for Defendant Incorporated Company B.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On August 11, 2015, the Defendant driven epiced 161, 2015, the epiced 22:00, the epiced 139% alcohol concentration at approximately 20km from the road in front of the “marwon cafeteria,” located in the Young-gun, Young-gun, Young-gun, Young-gu, Gangwon-gu, Gangwon-do, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor 161) to the instant intersection.

Defendant A’s 2016 High 30, an employee of Defendant A Co., Ltd., and a person in charge of overall management of factory B factories of Defendant C Co., Ltd. in Gangwon-gu, Gangwon-do, and Defendant Co., Ltd. is a corporation established for the purpose of producing agricultural products.

1. Where it is deemed that a personal sewage treatment facility is installed, operated, or managed in a manner that fails to meet the standards for effluent water quality, the Mayor of a Special Self-Governing City, a Special Self-Governing Province, or the head of a Si/Gun/Gu may issue an order to improve the facility to the owner or manager thereof for a specified period, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, and no person shall comply with

On July 1, 2015, the Defendant issued an order to improve the overall improvement of the treatment facilities of sewage to September 15, 2015, which was issued on August 24, 2015, that “the overall improvement of the treatment facilities of sewage to September 15, 2015, would be treated below the criteria for effluent water quality” on the ground that the water quality examination conducted by static-gun at the above factory B, a company, the above agricultural company failed to comply with the above order to improve the treatment facilities by September 15, 2015.

2. Defendant Company B, at the date and time of Paragraph 1, and at the place, Defendant Company B, an employee of the Defendant, did not comply with the improvement order as described in Paragraph 1 with respect to the Defendant’s business.

Summary of Evidence

"2015 High 161"

1. Part of a protocol concerning the examination of suspect of the defendant;

1. Notification of the results of the crackdown on driving under drinking, and driving under drinking;