logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2013.09.11 2013고단2722
도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On September 10, 2010, the Defendant was issued a summary order of a fine of two million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Suwon District Court on September 10, 201, and on March 21, 2012, the Defendant was issued a summary order of a fine of five million won by the same court on March 21, 2012.

1. Violation of the Road Traffic Act as of April 24, 2013, and the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act;

A. On April 24, 2013, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act: (a) around 03:50, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.080% under the influence of alcohol from the influent land to the influence of the 967 heading on the street; (b) on April 24, 2013, operated B-G vehicles without obtaining a driver’s license.

(b) No automobile shall be operated unless it is covered by mandatory insurance in violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act;

Nevertheless, the Defendant operated the said B vehicle without purchasing a mandatory motor vehicle insurance policy at the same time and place as the foregoing paragraph (a).

2. Violation of the Road Traffic Act as of April 25, 2013 and the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act;

A. On May 25, 2013, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving) and driven BG vehicles without obtaining a driver’s license in approximately 50 meters section from 650 east-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, to the front of the same Sejong-si street.

(b) No automobile which is not covered by the mandatory insurance in violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act shall be operated;

Nevertheless, the Defendant operated the said B vehicle without purchasing a mandatory motor vehicle insurance policy at the same time and place as the foregoing paragraph (a).

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on actions taken against an employer, and report on the status of an employer-employed driver;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Mandatory insurance policies;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of inquiry reports and investigation reports (Attachment of the previous and summary order);

1. Relevant Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

arrow