Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

Any owner of construction machinery shall undergo a regular inspection on the construction machinery, and the Mayor/Do Governor may order the construction machinery that has failed to pass a regular inspection to undergo repair works.

On March 21, 2017, the Defendant was judged to have failed to undergo a regular inspection, and on August 3, 2017, the Defendant failed to comply with the maintenance order within the given period, without justifiable grounds, even after receiving an order for maintenance inspection under the condition that “the construction machinery owned by the Defendant was maintained by the head of the vehicle registration office of the Daegu Metropolitan City, Daegu Metropolitan City, by September 1, 2017, such as “the time limit for the operation of the motor vehicle,” “the power and prevention device defect,” “the state of operation of the AMF,” etc. of the said construction machinery.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A charge book-construction machinery register, individual specifications of construction machinery, inspection status, advance notice of charge and order for repair, order for repair of construction machinery, order for repair of construction machinery, and request for registered mail;

1. A notice (38 pages of evidentiary records) which is non-compliant with an inspection of construction machinery, a photo ledger;

1. The defendant asserted that the above construction machinery was not notified of structural modification when he purchased the construction machinery of this case from the former owner. However, although the maintenance order of this case stated "the structural modification or other defective amount" as one of the matters requiring maintenance, the facts charged of this case are not included in the non-performance of the above matters, and the facts alleged by the defendant are not affected by the establishment of crime, and according to the above evidence, it is acknowledged that the defendant was notified of structural modification to the former owner at the time of purchasing the construction machinery of this case. Accordingly, the defendant cannot be deemed to have justifiable grounds for failing to comply with the maintenance order within the given time limit after receiving the maintenance order of this case).

1. The provision of relevant laws concerning criminal facts;