logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 천안지원 2017.06.23 2017고단866
자동차관리법위반등
Text

The punishment of the accused shall be determined by ten months of imprisonment.

However, the above sentence shall be executed for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On February 23, 2017, the Defendant violated the Automobile Management Act: (a) in the Defendant’s residence located in Seo-gu B Housing B B (105) in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu; (b) was kept in custody due to the nonperformance of this tax; and (c) was unable to operate a vehicle due to the failure of this tax; (c) subsequently, the Defendant forged C identification number plates using a flexible title to operate the vehicle; (d) on March 16, 2017, by attaching a forged number plate on the above Spo-gu 166-day vehicle until it is discovered to the police officer at the front of the 42 internal distance of Mapo-gu, Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si; and (e) on March 16, 2017.

2. The Defendant in violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Damage Compensation Act is the owner’s interest of CSpo-Spo-si Spo-si Spo-si Spo-si Spo-si owner, and the owner of a vehicle is prohibited from operating a vehicle not covered by mandatory insurance on the road.

A. On January 31, 2015, the Defendant, who operated a car free insurance contract for C SP car, operated the said C SP car that was not covered by mandatory insurance before F located in the Northern-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu.

From that time until March 16, 2017, the Defendant operated the said C SP car, which was not covered by mandatory insurance, such as the first set of attached Table 1 of the List of Offenses.

B. On February 21, 2013, the Defendant operated the said D vehicle not covered by mandatory insurance at 3 A in front of the Seocho-gu Seocho-gu Seocho-gu Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on February 21, 2013, around 23:45, the Defendant operated the said D vehicle not covered by mandatory insurance.

From that time until December 2, 2014, the Defendant operated the said D vehicle, which was not covered by mandatory insurance, as shown in Table 2 of the Crimes List 15 below.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Details of each motor vehicle registration register, inquiries into the ledger of motor vehicle registration, details of operation of each non-life insurance policy, and details of each mandatory insurance contract;

1. Scenic photographs of crackdowns;

1. Application of seizure records and statutes concerning the list of seizure;

1. Article 78 subparagraph 2 of the relevant Act and Article 71 (1) of the Automobile Management Act (registration number plate) concerning facts constituting an offense and Articles 78 subparagraph 2 and 71 (1);

arrow