logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2014.10.02 2014고단1989
도로교통법위반등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 300,000 won.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

In order for anyone to operate a vehicle on the road, the defendant operated the automobile with no registered wheels without mandatory insurance from June 30, 2014 to July 2, 2014.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to a certificate of disuse of a two-wheeled motor vehicle and notice of detection of the driver;

1. Article 46 of the Act on the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation and Articles 46 (2) 2 and 8 of the Act on the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation, and Selection of a fine;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The dismissal part of the prosecution under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the summary of the violation of the Road Traffic Act is as follows: (a) around 07:50 on July 02, 2014, the Defendant driven a non-registered driving-wheeled vehicle and proceeded along five lanes in the direction direction direction, etc. at the direction direction, etc. at the direction direction, etc. at the direction of the victim and neglected his duty of care to safely change the lanes from five lanes to four lanes; (b) the victim B driving the victim's CM3 vehicle that was going on a four-lane course due to the change of course from five lanes to four lanes as it was, after receiving the part of the part on the left side of the Defendant's vehicle, with the repair cost of KRW 1,006,122 on the victim's vehicle from the left side of the Defendant.

2. We examine the crime falling under Article 151 of the Road Traffic Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim's express intent under Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents. According to the records, it is evident that the victim B withdraws his/her wish to punish the defendant after the prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, this part of the prosecution is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow