logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.10.24 2017고정382
자동차관리법위반
Text

Defendant

A A shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won and by a fine of 500,000 won, respectively.

Defendant

A above.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A is a person who operates a used vehicle sales business under the trade name of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D 204 (State)B.

Where a motor vehicle dealer sells a motor vehicle or arranges the sale of a motor vehicle, he/she shall notify in writing the buyer of the relevant motor vehicle before concluding the sales contract of the performance and condition inspection of a used motor vehicle of the performance and condition inspection of the relevant motor vehicle, the performance and condition inspection of the relevant motor vehicle of the performance and devices, etc.

Nevertheless, on October 21, 2015, the Defendant entered into a contract to sell EMW passenger cars to Shoco et al. at the office of the above “B” office, and did not notify in writing the above BM passenger cars' performance and condition inspection register. Thus, the Defendant violated the automobile management business entity’s obligation to notify in writing.

2. Defendant B’s representative, the Defendant Company B, did not notify the Defendant in writing of the record of inspection of performance and condition of used cars as set forth in the above 1. As to the Defendant’s business, Defendant B violated the automobile management business entity’s duty of notification.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant A's partial statement

1. Legal statement of the witness F, and some of the witness G legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to motor vehicle registration certificates, certificates of transfer of motor vehicles, and investigation reports;

1. Article 80 subparagraph 6 of the Automobile Management Act, Article 58 (1) 1 of the Motor Vehicle Management Act, and Article 80 subparagraph 6 of the said Act, and Article 80 subparagraph 2 of the said Act, and Articles 58 (1) 1 and 83 of the Motor Vehicle Management Act, and the selection of fines;

1. Defendant A to be detained in a workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act / [the Defendants issued F a record of inspection of performance and condition of used cars

The argument is asserted.

However, the following circumstances recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, i.e., F, from investigative agencies to this court.

arrow