logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 영월지원 2016.11.15 2016고단344
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor of ten months, and by a fine of one million won, respectively.

Defendant

B The above fine shall not be paid.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[criminal power] On May 21, 2007, Defendant A was issued a summary order of one million won for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Youngcheon District Court's Yeongdeungpo Branch's monthly support on February 15, 2008; Defendant A was issued a summary order of 1.5 million won for the same crime in the same court on February 15, 2008; Defendant A was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and two years for the same crime in the same court on May 20, 2008; and Defendant A was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime in the same court on November 18, 2008.

【Criminal Facts】

1. Defendant A (driving on May 22, 2016) driven C Poter truck at a section of about 500 meters from the front of an influent private house located at 0.137% in the Shin Jong-gun, Gangwon-gun, Gangwon-gun, under the influence of alcohol around 03:16, to the front of an influent private house located at 20 meters in the same Ri.

2. Defendant B

A. On April 15, 2013, the Defendant violated the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, without purchasing mandatory insurance, operated C Poter freight cars from the D apartment parking lot in Gangwon-gun, Gangwon-do to the Napon Napung-ri, which is located in the same military northwest-do, and without purchasing mandatory insurance on 12 occasions as indicated in the attached crime list.

B. On May 21, 2016, the Defendant violated the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act: (a) as the owner of the said cargo vehicle, A lent the said cargo vehicle on or around May 21, 2016; (b) given A the keys of the said vehicle without notifying A of the fact that the said vehicle was not mandatory insurance; and (c) caused A to operate the said vehicle on or after having A operate the said vehicle as described in paragraph (1) at the time and place specified in paragraph (1).

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Protocol concerning the suspect interrogation of each of the Defendants

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Investigation report (Inquiry into the history of purchasing mandatory insurance);

1. Previous convictions as indicated in the judgment: Criminal records and investigation reports (verification of criminal records A of the same kind of suspect) of Defendant A.

arrow