logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.28 2018고정2178
화물자동차운수사업법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who operates an article center in the name of “C”.

No owner or user of a private-use truck shall provide or lease such private-use truck commercially for transport of cargo without obtaining permission from the Mayor/Do Governor.

Nevertheless, on June 24, 2018, the Defendant received KRW 1,000,000 from D (49) for transportation costs, and carried an article on the E and Fpoter 1t Cargo Vehicles, a private truck, and sent the article to the front roads of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Seoul.

Around 13:00 on June 24, 2018, the Defendant received KRW 1,000,000 from D (49) on the front side of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G at the transportation cost, and sent an article to E and Fpoter 1t Cargo Vehicles, a private truck, and sent the article to the Dongcheon-si, Gyeongcheon-si.

“The” appears to be a clerical error.

Accordingly, the defendant provided a private-use truck for a commercial transport purpose.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspect of H with respect to the police;

1. A simplified statement of H;

1. On-site photographs, comprehensive details of vehicles (E), comprehensive details of vehicles (F) and application of statutes;

1. Article 67 Subparag. 7 and Article 56 of the relevant Act concerning facts constituting an offense, as well as selection of a fine;

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;

1. Although the reason for sentencing under Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, there are extenuating circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant recognized the instant crime and appears to be contrary to the recognition of the criminal act. However, despite the fact that the defendant provided a private-use truck for a commercial transport purpose, he/she again commits the instant crime of the same kind despite the fact that he/she was subject to criminal punishment, and all kinds of sentencing shown in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the defendant's age, sex, surrounding circumstances, motive, means, and consequence of the instant crime.

arrow