logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2014.08.14 2014고정997
자동차손해배상보장법위반
Text

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

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

Reasons

Criminal facts

No motor vehicle which is not covered by mandatory insurance shall be operated on a road.

1. Around 10:45 on July 25, 2009, the Defendant operated a passenger car between B, which was not mandatory insurance, at a point 235 km in the direction of the ceiling on the upper line of the Honam Line.

2. On October 27, 2010, around 12:36, the Defendant operated the said van, which was not covered by mandatory insurance, on a total of six occasions, from the time to February 23:27, 2014, at the second freedom in the Goyang-si Hayang-dong, the Defendant operated the said van, which was not covered by mandatory insurance, from the time to February 27, 2014.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Inspection of each motor vehicle register, inquiry of the amount of motor vehicles with no insurance, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing each mandatory insurance contract;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts and the main text of Article 46(2), Article 8 of the former Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (amended by Act No. 11369, Feb. 22, 2012; hereinafter referred to as the "Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act"), the main text of Article 8 (1) (the operation of a motor vehicle which is not covered by mandatory insurance in the table of crime Nos. 1, 2, and 3 among the provisions of paragraphs (1) and (2)), each of Article 46(2)2, the main sentence of Article 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (the operation of a motor vehicle which is not covered by mandatory insurance in the table of crime No. 4, 5, and 6 in the

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. In full view of the favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is recognized and reflected, the fact that there is no same kind of criminal records, etc., and the circumstances leading to the operation of an automobile that has not bought mandatory insurance, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, home environment, and circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the amount of the fine prescribed in the summary order is determined to be appropriate, and thus, the punishment

arrow