logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.08 2015고단3159
여객자동차운수사업법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, a car rental business entity, leased B Kaman car from B Kamana.

No person who rents a commercial motor vehicle of a rent-a-car business entity shall use such motor vehicle for transport with compensation or sublet it to any third party.

Nevertheless, around 02:27 on February 13, 2015, the Defendant: (a) transported to the vicinity of the Gangnam-gu Seoul rolling stock station, 2 foreign customers under the name-free contract; and (b) provided transport of 6900 won for transport with commercial motor vehicles leased by using the “Baber” display contract; and (c) used the commercial motor vehicle for transport with compensation, from January 26, 2015 to February 13, 2015, 12:59 to February 13, 2015, 202:25 times in total, and 125 times in total, including two foreign customers under the name-free contract; and (d) one Korean citizen.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police interrogation protocol against the accused;

1. Inquiry into the enemy;

1. A detailed statement on the operation of a suspect;

1. An amount list of crimes committed by a suspect who operates a burner taxi;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (Evidence records 19 pages);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 92 subparagraph 11 and 34 (1) of the Passenger Transport Service Act (to use leased automobiles for transport with compensation and to select fines);

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the following grounds: (a) the Defendant’s reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is against the Defendant and there is no record of the same kind of crime

arrow