logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 평택지원 2018.10.18 2018고정133
자동차관리법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Where an owner of a motor vehicle intends to conduct the tubes on the items prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Construction and Transportation of national land, he/she shall obtain approval from the head of the relevant Si/Gun/Gu, and shall not operate a motor vehicle knowing that it is a motor vehicle

Nevertheless, on September 5, 2017, from around 13:58 to October 12:40, 2017, the Defendant, as indicated in the list of crimes in the attached Table, provided that the Defendant, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table, was operating a vehicle by linking the vehicle to the Trackter without obtaining approval from the competent authorities in the vicinity C, which is located in Ansan City B over a total of 27 occasions.

Judgment

The Motor Vehicle Management Act has been punished when the owner of a motor vehicle intends to conduct the tubes for the items prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport of the Republic of Korea with the approval of the head of the Si/Gun/Gu, and is aware that it

However, motor vehicles determined by Presidential Decree are excluded from the above punishment, and the Enforcement Decree of the Motor Vehicle Management Act stipulates agricultural machinery according to the Agricultural Mechanization Promotion Act as one of the motor vehicles excluded.

B. The Promotion of Agricultural Mechanization is defined as "a machine, equipment, and accessory equipment used in the production of agricultural and forestry livestock products" as one of agricultural machinery, and accordingly, the Enforcement Rule of the Promotion of Agricultural Mechanization is specifically considered as a agricultural track and bitr agricultural machine.

With respect to such agricultural machinery, manufacturers and importers are subject to examination in accordance with Article 9 of the Agricultural Mechanization Promotion Act and are subject to the indication of agricultural machinery.

In addition, the owner or user of agricultural machinery, such as an agricultural track, imposes a duty not to arbitrarily alter or change the structure of safety devices for agricultural machinery subject to safety management.

However, according to the evidence submitted by the defendant, the Tractor operated by the defendant was examined as an agricultural Track according to the Agricultural Mechanization Promotion Act as seen earlier.

arrow