logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.08.24 2016고정2560
여객자동차운수사업법위반
Text

Defendant

A As to the violation of the Passenger Transport Business Act with respect to D, KRW 300,00,00.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On November 18, 2015, Defendant A was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on June of imprisonment with prison labor for alteration of official documents at the Incheon District Court, etc., and the judgment became final and conclusive on November 26, 2015.

The Defendant is the representative of the F building in Bupyeong-gu Incheon and the “C” in subparagraph G.

No transport business operator shall allow any person who is not a transport business operator or a person who is not a transport business operator to run passenger transport service with or without compensation by using the whole or part of his commercial automobiles.

Nevertheless, from March 18, 201 to September 30, 201, the Defendant had B operate passenger transport business by allowing B to use a bus for business use (D) owned by “C” and from January 2, 2014 to May 4, 2016, a bus for business use owned by “C”.

2. No person, other than Defendant B trucking business operator, shall run passenger transport business under his/her own or another person’s name by using any or all of the commercial automobiles of a trucking business operator, nor shall he/she receive instructions related to the business from a transport business operator;

Notwithstanding the fact that the Defendant is not a transport business entity, the Defendant used a commercial automobile bus (D) owned by “C” from March 18, 2011 to September 30, 201, and operated passenger transport business under the name of “C” as a transport business entity, using a bus (E) owned by “C” from January 2, 2014 to May 4, 2016.

3. The Defendant Co., Ltd. was a corporation carrying on transportation business, etc., and the representative A, at the same time and place as that set forth in paragraph 1, committed the same violation as set forth in paragraph 1 in relation to the Defendant’s business.

Summary of Evidence

1. The Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement of examination of the witness H as to the witness H;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of some police officers against the defendant A or B;

1. Statement made to I by the police;

1. A report on internal investigation (inspection of the register of motor vehicles entering into the reported area), investigation report (the actual bus of the suspect);

arrow