1. The defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won;

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

Punishment of the crime

On September 19, 2017, the Defendant: (a) driven a C Freight truck loaded with the cargo (hereinafter “instant cargo”) on September 19, 2017, and entered the road front of the business office of the Siljin-gu Highway E in the Sejong-si in the Sejong-si; (b) was measured as exceeding the limit of KRW 1:5.18 tons, KRW 2 stable 1.89 tons, gross weight 17.07 tons; and (c) was demanded by the person in charge of measuring the cause of the control of the restriction on operation, and accordingly rejected the demand for re-measurement by the person in charge of measuring the cause of the restriction on operation, without justifiable grounds.

Accordingly, the Defendant did not comply with the demand for measuring the load load of the control center for restriction on operation without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of a protocol concerning the examination of suspect of the defendant;

2. A statement of the F;

3. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the written accusation;

1. Article 115 of the Act and Articles 115 subparagraph 4 and 77 (4) of the Act on the Roads of which punishment is selected for facts constituting an offense;

2. Determination on the Defendant’s assertion under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act with respect to detention in the workhouses

1. The main point of the argument is that the freight of this case can be loaded with a total of 15 tons with three storages. At the time of the instant truck, the cargo of this case had a total of 10 tons loaded with a cargo of this case, which could not exceed the maximum limit of storage.

It is wrong that the measurement officer measured the load of the Cargo of this case with the 1 livestock 5.18 tons, 2 livestock 1.89 tons, 17.07 tons of gross weight, 17.07 tons.

Nevertheless, the person in charge of measurement passed the measurement point only with two dubs alone without unloading three dubs of the instant cargo vehicles.

With the suppression of suppression, the re-measurement by legitimate procedures has been unilaterally controlled without any restriction.

Therefore, this case cannot be seen as a violation of road law.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence adopted and examined by the court, the Defendant, as stated in the judgment, was driving the instant cargo vehicle and passing through the lower-class measurement point as indicated in the facts constituting the crime, and was discovered to exceed the lower-class limit and was demanded to re-measurement by the person in charge of the measurement without justifiable grounds.