logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.09.29 2016고단2499
도로교통법위반(무면허운전)
Text

1. Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000;

2. Where the defendant does not pay the above fine.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

around 10:45 on June 14, 2016, the Defendant driven approximately 2 km vehicles from the front road of Young-gun, Young-gun, Young-gu, Young-gu to the third lux road of the same Eup/Myeon, without the driver’s license.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Report on the circumstances of driving without licenses, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the ledger of driver's licenses;

1. Subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act and Article 43 of the same Act concerning facts constituting a crime;

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

1. In full view of the reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances as well as the age, sexual conduct, environment, circumstances of crimes, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence as stated in the instant argument shall be determined as ordered (the sentencing criteria shall not apply to a crime for which no sentencing guidelines have been set). Unfavorable circumstances: (a) there was a record of having been sentenced several times of punishment due to driving without a license; and (b) in particular, on August 13, 2015, the Gwangju District Court sentenced two years of suspended sentence for six months due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) at the Gwangju District Court, which became final and conclusive on August 21, 2015, committed the instant crime without being aware of the fact that the judgment was under suspended execution.

The favorable circumstances are against the depth of the circumstances.

The A.I.D. A.I.D. in the next house shall be the A.I.D. head

In other words, it appears that the instant crime was committed by being taken to the hospital rapidly (see, e.g., the Defendant’s statement and the 19-20th page of the protected observation status received by this court on August 24, 2016).

arrow