logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.12.08 2016고단3528
부정사용공기호행사등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than four months and by a fine not exceeding 300,000 won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On April 2, 2016, at around 13:56, the Defendant of an illegal-use air defense event: (a) operated the Austria from the front of Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, to the front road of the 5km-dong Dag-dong Modon Apartment Apartment Apartment apartment located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, by attaching a number plate owned by the Defendant, who was not a number plate from approximately 5 km section from the 5 km-dong Dog-dong 256 to the front road of the Dagho-dong Dog-dong Dog

Accordingly, the defendant exercised the off-to-land number plate, which is an air defense that was illegally used.

2. The Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) at the same time and place as above, driving the above super-soil without obtaining a motorcycle driver’s license.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the ledger of driver's license, such as enforcement manuals, seizure records, list of seizure, ozone photographs, investigation reports, and the ledger of driver's license;

1. Relevant provisions of Article 238 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act for facts constituting an offense (a point of exercising the protection of unlawful air), subparagraph 2 of Article 154 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, and Articles 38 (1) 3 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. According to the Defendant’s assertion of the reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, all the circumstances revealed in the pleadings, including: (a) from August 2015, it appears that the Defendant had been running an Oralba, attaching a license plate owned by another person from around August 2015; (b) it appears that he/she had escaped without being present during the trial; (c) there was no criminal record other than a fine imposed once; (d) the previous criminal record of the fine was operated with an Oralba as non-licensed license; and (e) the Defendant was driving the Oralba as stated in the judgment that was not insured at

arrow