(영문) 수원지방법원 평택지원 2014.10.23 2014고단1093

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 평택지원 2014.10.23 2014고단1093

도로교통법위반

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 30,000 won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 30,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, who is driving a J-type cargo vehicle, is required to fasten the seat belt when the driver of the vehicle drives the vehicle, but was driving the vehicle at around 16:57 on June 15, 201, by driving the vehicle on the 16:57 on the 15th day of the 2014, without fastening the seat belt.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of K witness K;

1. Application of statutes governing enforcement manuals;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, subparagraph 6 of Article 156 and Article 50 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of fines for the punishment;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

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

1. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The defendant asserts that the defendant was only a safety belt to extract traffic rights by entering Orl Tol, and that the police officer who controlled only reported the situation at the time and did not drive the safety belt without putting the safety belt.

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment, the following facts are revealed: ① the Defendant was driving the vehicle, and the Defendant did not fasten the safety belt at the time Orthol, ② K, a police officer controlling the Defendant, was able to maintain the vehicles entering the part 2 to control those who did not wear the safety belt from the driver entering the Orthol in this court; ② the Defendant stated that the Defendant did not wear the safety belt before entering the Orthol; ③ the Defendant was forced to control the Defendant on the ground that the Defendant did not wear the safety belt before entering the Orthol; ③ the Defendant was forced to remove the safety belt to K after the police officer’s direct control, and the Defendant was forced to control the Defendant’s right of passage, not to mention the fact that it was forced to control the Defendant’s economic situation. However, K, a police officer controlling the Defendant, made a statement for about five minutes in order to draw the safety belt only without entering the Defendant’s hearing.

참조조문

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2015.07.17 2015노1300

-의정부지방법원 2020.08.13 2019고정1845

-서울서부지방법원 2019.06.04 2019고정174

-광주지방법원 목포지원 2019.10.29 2019고단752

-광주지방법원 2018.06.26 2017노4035