logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.06.15 2016노283
자동차관리법위반
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as stated in the lower judgment, did not acquire the instant vehicle as indicated in the judgment below, and thus, did not have any obligation to apply for the registration of transfer of ownership.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the defendant by misunderstanding the facts.

B. Even if the sentencing was found to be guilty, the lower court’s punishment (3 million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The lower court’s determination on the assertion of factual mistake 1) was based on the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, i.e., the instant vehicle was registered in the name of Sammp Goods Distribution Co., Ltd., and the said company was deemed to have no substance, but more than 100 minutes for the vehicle registered in the name of the said company, and even if the details of the unpaid fines for negligence for the pertinent registered vehicles are limited to the registered vehicles (46,936,520 won in total). In addition, E, for which the summary order was requested with the Defendant, purchased the HF car in the name of HF car in the name of HF T on August 2014, with the Defendant, using a large-scale vehicle.

In the statement, it is confirmed that the vehicles registered with the above company are actually distributed in large vehicles, and the defendant lent KRW 7.5 million to C in cash, which was known to C in the course of operating the golf course, and the defendant lost the Handphone number of C while replacing the Handphone and then did not contact at present.

However, in light of the Defendant’s economic situation at the time of the bad credit holder and the fact that the Defendant was unable to submit any materials about the transaction of money amounting to KRW 7.5 million, etc., it is difficult to believe such vindication. Even if there is a debt relationship, as alleged by the Defendant, even if there is a debt relationship, the Defendant’s registration certificate, seal impression certificate, corporate registration certificate, corporate registration certificate, and automobile transfer certificate, etc. at the time of being provided with the instant vehicle around November 201.

arrow