logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.11.02 2018고정2229
자동차관리법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the owner of Brando HG.

Where an owner of a motor vehicle intends to conduct the tubes on the items prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Construction and Transportation of the national land, he/she shall obtain approval from the head of the relevant Si/Gun/Gu, and no person shall operate a motor vehicle knowing that it is a motor vehicle which has been

Nevertheless,

1. Around March 2018, the Defendant, without obtaining approval from the competent authority, posted the Dold Dold Dold Dold Dold Dold Dold Dold Dold Do, etc. on the car owned by the Defendant at the underground parking lot of the apartment apartment located in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Nam-gu.

2. On June 18, 2018, the Defendant, while aware of the fact that the instant automobiles, etc., owned by the Defendant were installed on the road front of the village 3 complex in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Nam-gu, Incheon, and without approval, operated the said automobiles.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The contents of receipt and attachment photographs of the national newspaper;

1. Reports on internal investigation (cases related to the same level of assistance);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (in cases of attaching photographs to vehicles);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Article 81 subparag. 19, and Article 34 of the Motor Vehicle Management Act (the point of non-authorizationing), Article 81 subparag. 20, and Article 34 of the Motor Vehicle Management Act (the point of operating non-approvaling motor vehicles), and the selection of fines, respectively;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. The sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, based on the following factors: (a) the Defendant was punished as having been operating an unauthorized motor vehicle; (b) the degree of risk equivalent to the ESD assistant system, such as daytime assistant driving, etc.; and (c) the Defendant’s present completion of restoration from the original state, shall be sentenced to the same sentence as the order.

arrow