logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.02.17 2015고정4397
항만법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the owner and the captain of Busan fleet C(18 tons).

A person who intends to use harbor facilities shall use harbor facilities with permission from the Minister of Oceans and Fisheries or with approval from a person who has been delegated or entrusted with the operation of harbor facilities by the Minister of Oceans and Fisheries (operator of harbor facilities), as prescribed by Presidential Decree.

1. On May 20, 201, the Defendant purchased a tugboat C on May 20, 201, and came into contact with the head of the Bridge in Busan Young-gu.

Despite the consent of the management authority as a wharf managed and operated by the Busan Port Corporation, the head of the large-scale animal capacity shall obtain the consent from May 20, 201 to August 25, 201, as well as the defendant from May 30, 2015 to May 30, 2015 without the consent.

6. Until September, 200, Busan Young-do was mooring at the Gando-dong of the Bando-dong of the Bando-dong of the Bando-do-dong, and the port facilities were used without permission.

2. From August 25, 2014 to May 26, 2015, the Defendant, without the permission of the competent management authority, completed the repair of the ship at the shipbuilding yard, which is a port facility located in Busan, which is a port facility located in D, from August 25, 2014 to May 26, 2015; and thereafter, from May 27, 2015 to May 14:20 of the same day, the Defendant used the port facility without the permission while repairing the deck at the wharf located in Busan, Seo-gu D, Busan, from May 27, 2015 to May 14:20 of the same month.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Copy of the police statement made to F;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the use of a multiple wharf as stated in the judgment of the court below without the consent of the court below constitutes an urgent escape because the location map of the tugboat C berthing, the above and landing confirmation document, the fishery harbor district map, the name, location, and area of the harbor, the application for the use of harbor facilities (approval), the details and route receipts of the use of the harbor, and the photo [the defendant and his defense counsel] of the violation of the law of the port. However, according to the above evidence, the defendant is anchored to repair the ship prior to departure.

arrow