logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2014.05.21 2013고단2813
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
Text

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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[2013 Height4086] The defendant is a holder of a DNA body-based vehicle.

At around 22:35 on December 12, 2009, the Defendant operated the said automobile without mandatory insurance at a point of 300 meters in the Southern-ri Personnel Tunnels 300 meters south-do.

In addition, from that time until February 6, 2013, the Defendant operated the said automobile without having subscribed to mandatory insurance over a total of 11 times, such as the attached list of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Inquiry into matters of a mandatory insurance contract;

1. Statement on the non-insurance running car;

1. Application of the register of automobiles statutes

1. Article 46(2), the main text of Article 8 (2) and Article 46(2) of the former Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (amended by Act No. 11369, Feb. 22, 2012; Act No. 11369, Aug. 23, 2012); Article 46(2)2 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act; the main text of Article 8 (Attached Table Nos. 1 through 9 of the Motor Vehicle Accident Compensation Act (Attached Table No. 10 and 11 of the Motor Vehicle Accident Compensation Act); and each choice of fines

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. The portion not guilty under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. Facts charged [2013 Highest 2813]

A. The Defendant is a person engaging in driving a vehicle by re-afusing the Road Traffic Act (if the vehicle was involved) and the Defendant is a person driving the vehicle.

around 23:30 on February 25, 2013, the Defendant came to turn to the left from the side of Samsung apartment to the mountain market in order to turn to the left.

In this case, the driver has a duty of care to identify and drive the course safety by accurately manipulating the steering system, brake system, etc. of the vehicle with the driver's license and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected to turn to the left as it was, and was parked on the right-hand side by occupational negligence, followed by the left-hand side of the H Kazop vehicle owned by the victim G.

arrow