logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.07.22 2016노639
도로교통법위반등
Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment of the lower court (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. According to the prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of the facts and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor misunderstanding of the legal principles, since it is possible to fully recognize the operation control over the cargo vehicle by the defendant, the defendant who operated the cargo vehicle without purchasing mandatory insurance shall be deemed to have committed a violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Damage Compensation Act. However, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the charge of violating the Guarantee of Automobile Damage Compensation Act against the defendant,

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too uncomfortable.

2. Determination

A. As to the Prosecutor’s assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the term of liability insurance for C Freight Vehicles (hereinafter “instant Freight Vehicles”) operated by the Defendant was expired as of May 19, 201.

As such, no motor vehicle that is not covered by mandatory insurance shall operate on the road.

Nevertheless, at around 11:40 on December 29, 2014, the Defendant driven approximately KRW 1 km from the street 716-1 in front of the opening to D, which is located from the street 716-1.

2) The lower court determined as follows, based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, that is, ① the instant cargo vehicle is used as a business vehicle for transporting swine pots from “E farm”, which is a five tons-ton-clox truck to “E farm,” ② the instant cargo vehicle was provided by F, a joint operator of “E farm,” and F, provided material facilities and feed of farm, such as the instant cargo vehicle, the instant vehicle, and other joint operators, supplied pigs; ③ the Defendant transported swine pots by driving the instant cargo vehicle from “E farm,” or performed work, such as preparation, disinfection, and cleaning of work sites.

arrow