logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2013.08.29 2013고정1000
액화석유가스의안전관리및사업법위반등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be paid.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a liquefied petroleum gas dealer who sells liquefied petroleum gas under the trade name of Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seoul, and D is an employee of the above “C” and delivers liquefied petroleum gas to E using freight cars.

1. A liquefied petroleum gas dealer in violation of the Safety Control and Business of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Act stored approximately 20 containers of liquefied petroleum gas charging containers in the container storage room separately from charging containers and residual gas containers, D from August 29, 2012 to August 23:50, 2012, and from August 29, 2012 to 06:30 of the following day, the Seoul Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F Housing stored approximately 20 containers of liquefied petroleum gas charging containers in the nearby delivery and empty container, and stored them in the above E-mail vehicle.

Accordingly, D, an employee of the defendant, violated the Safety Control and Business of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Act in relation to the defendant's business.

2. Where a person who transports high-pressure gas in violation of the High-Pressure Gas Safety Control Act intends to park a container for filling on a vehicle while carrying such container for filling, he/she shall avoid nearby the protection facilities, such as a house, and select a safe place in consideration of traffic conditions, topographical conditions, fire, etc. in and around the house except when loading or unloading the container for filling at a vehicle;

D Nevertheless, at the time and place specified in paragraph (1) above, the house parked the above vehicle in the nearby delivery and vacant lot while placing the high-pressure gas charging container in the E-cargo, such as Paragraph (1).

Accordingly, D, an employee of the defendant, was in violation of the High-Pressure Gas Safety Control Act.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning G police statements;

1. Loading a container for filling under Article 51, subparagraph 3 of Article 48, or Article 13 (1) of the Safety Control and Business of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Act (other than a container storage room) concerning criminal facts, Article 42-2, subparagraph 3 of Article 42, or Article 22 (1) of the High-Pressure Gas Safety Control Act;

arrow