logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안양지원 2017.05.11 2016고정1046
자동차관리법위반등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the owner of CF lebio leboms.

1. Where an owner of a motor vehicle in violation of the Motor Vehicle Management Act intends to conduct 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 a Si/Gun/Gu, and shall not operate a motor vehicle knowing that it is a motor vehicle

Nevertheless, the Defendant, on September 2016, without obtaining the approval for change of structure and device on the roof of the above lele lele van, affixed light light on the roof of the above lele lele van without obtaining the approval for change of structure and device on the lele van in Songpa

(a) On October 14, 2016, 200, 838-14 Hayang-gu, Annyang-gu, Annyang-si 2:

B. On October 18, 2016, around 13:00, in the vicinity of the YY-dong YY-dong YY-dong YY-dong at Anyang-si, the Defendants operated the said lele-ray owned by the Defendant, without obtaining the approval of the competent authority, respectively.

2. No person who violates the traffic laws shall drive any motor vehicle, etc. carrying on traffic control, motor vehicle for criminal investigation, or any other motor vehicle with colors, signs, etc. similar to emergency motor vehicles, nor drive any motor vehicle, etc. carrying such colors, signs, etc.;

Nevertheless, on September 2016, the Defendant, like Paragraph 1, has affixed light light light on the roof of the front lele van on the top of the front lele van in Franchis not exceeding Songpa-gu Seoul, 2016.

(a) On October 14, 2016, 200, 838-14 Hayang-gu, Annyang-gu, Annyang-si 2:

B. On October 18, 2016, around 13:00, at the vicinity of the walk-distance located in the Yandong-gu Yanyang-si, the Defendant’s possession, with colors or signs similar to those for traffic control vehicles, criminal investigation vehicles, or emergency motor vehicles, operated the walk-o vehicle, respectively.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. Article 81 subparag. 19, Article 20, and Article 34 of the Automobile Management Act concerning the facts constituting an offense; Article 154 subparag. 1, and Article 42 subparag. 1 of the Road Traffic Act.

arrow