logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2018.08.28 2018고정87
자동차손해배상보장법위반등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On September 18, 2017, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.189% of alcohol leveling from a 100-meter section without a motor device bicycle license, and driving a 90-c c c ob ob ob ob ob ob ob ob ob ob oc ob ob ob ob ob ob ob ob ob ob ob ob ob ob ob ob ob ob ob ob obs

2. The Defendant violated the Guarantee of Automobile Damage Compensation Act: (a) operated the Defendant’s non-registered and non-registered 90cc Oral c with no mandatory insurance at the date and place specified in paragraph (1).

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Report on the circumstances of a driver who is placed in driving and notification of the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. Report on the circumstances of driving without a license;

1. Relevant photographs;

1. Notification to a department related to reporting 112 cases;

1. The driver's license ledger;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing the place of criminal offense;

1. Article 46 (2) 2, the main sentence of Article 8 (Operation of Motor Vehicles which are not Mandatory Insurance), Article 148-2 (2) 2, and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, and Articles 154 (2) and 43 of the Road Traffic Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

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

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act include not only the Defendant’s experience of drinking or unlicensed driving since around 2003, but also the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes at the same time despite the fact that the Defendant was punished as a violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Compensation in around 2013, the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes, the blood alcohol concentration high, and the circumstances leading up to the detection of the crime.

However, the fact that the defendant recognizes all of the crimes of this case and reflects them, and the age of the defendant.

arrow