logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.05.31 2016고정2479
자동차관리법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The Defendant is the owner of a Cbera-Sa cruise car.

No person shall cover a registration number plate or make it illegible, and shall operate such a motor vehicle.

Nevertheless, on September 23, 2016, the Defendant operated the foregoing vehicle, which was difficult to identify the registration number plate with the paper attached to the “D” on the front of the Plaintiff’s front road, from around 111, Dok-ro, Dok-si, Bupyeong-si, Bupyeong-si, Busan.

2. In a judgment, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving the elements of the crime charged in a criminal trial, and such proof ought to reach the extent that the judge makes a reasonable doubt unsworn, and there is a doubtful amnesty if there is no such proof.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

From the beginning of the investigation to the time of this law, the defendant denies the facts charged that he did not have any attachment on his license plate.

In the instant case, according to the evidence submitted, the following facts are acknowledged: ① (a) the Defendant’s vehicle was attached only to the license plate; (b) the front license plate was not attached; (c) the size of paper attached to the license plate was not significant; and (d) the number 20,000 out of 4 of the number of “C” as the type of paper attached to the subsequent license plate was not significant; and (e) the angle or section viewed as showing a “D” or the “E” in the front place according to the wind direction; (c) the Defendant operated the vehicle after September 22, 2016 and September 23, 2016 with a paper attached to the license plate.

According to the above facts, it seems difficult to readily conclude that a paper attached to put a license plate for the purpose of avoiding the crackdown on speed or alcohol violations, and there is somewhat many records of the Defendant’s control over the violation of parking regulations or over-speed.

Even if there is no other reason to see that the defendant has been subject to multiple crackdowns in the past.

(b) if any;

arrow