logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2020.10.21 2020고정1579
자동차손해배상보장법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a holder of Branchisa car.

1. Around 02:40 on September 10, 2015, the Defendant, without purchasing mandatory insurance, operated the said passenger car at the front of the Damnam-si Damnam-si C apartment.

2. The Defendant, without purchasing mandatory insurance from around 13:13 to 14:4, on August 23, 2016, operated the said car from the front street in Gwangju City D E to the front street in the Gangnam-gun of Gangwon-gun of Gangwon-gu to the front street in the Gowon-gun of Gangwon-gu.

Summary of Evidence

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the defendant's statutory statement, compulsory insurance contracts, inquiry of non-insurance cars;

1. Article 46 (2) 2 and the main sentence of Article 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and Article 46 (2) 2 and the main sentence of Article 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50

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

1. A favorable circumstance is that the defendant led to the sentencing reason of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it seems that the economic situation is not good.

There are circumstances in which a case around 2015 and 2016 was immediately prosecuted and the defendant was not tried together with other cases of the same kind prosecuted at that time.

However, considering the risk of driving of non-insurance vehicles and the social harm caused thereby, the nature of the crime is not weak.

In addition, there are many traffic-related criminal records against the defendant, and the defendant has been punished several times for the same crime, but repeated again.

It is not possible to consider the equity in punishment with respect to the number of non-insurance vehicles, driving distance, and similar cases.

The punishment shall be determined as ordered by taking into account such unforeseen circumstances.

arrow