The summary of the facts charged of this case is as follows: "the defendant is a person operating the C Parking lot located in Busan Jung-gu, about 2 km from the Head of Busan Dong-gu and the Head of the BB, and around 10:0 on June 9, 2007, who parked in D on the above BB and caused about 6 weeks of injury to V due to negligence in the course of performing work for the first time before the Land Management Agency located in the above Seocho-dong area and caused about 7 weeks of injury to D. The above FF's insurance contract was executed for about 6 weeks for the above EF 8's family insurance contract, but the defendant who is not a member of D's family is not an insurance for the above FF 8's insurance contract for the above FF 8's above FF 2's insurance contract for the above FF 8's insurance contract for the above FF 2's insurance contract for the above FF 8'. It is difficult for the defendant to receive damages due to the above accident.

2. Determination

The defendant has changed from the investigative agency to the court that himself was actually in the process of accepting the insurance in accordance with the non-life insurance special contract, but did not have the intention to obtain the insurance, and there was no risk of causing damage to the victim.

First of all, with respect to the application of the exemption clause of the "other special terms and conditions for driving insurance", there is a exemption clause that prohibits the Defendant from compensating for any damage caused by an accident in the course of driving a motor vehicle, such as car business, among the insurance clauses of the FM Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. in which the Defendant was a party, but according to the record such as the witness G's legal statement, the Defendant subscribed the FF Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. to the FF Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. through G through G., and it is recognized that the Defendant did not know the existence and contents of the exemption clause, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant explained the exemption clause from the FF Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. from the FF Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. on the part of the FF Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., Ltd., or that there is no other way to recognize that the Defendant had been aware of the exemption clause. Even if the said provision is effective, it is difficult to recognize that the Defendant actually lent the above exemption clause to the investigative agency for 19 years ago.

Then, apart from the fact that the insured vehicle had been loaded with the actual condition of the insured vehicle, the insurance money corresponding to the Large Compensation I would not have been paid by the F Fire Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., and it is hard to find that the Defendant would have paid the insurance money corresponding to the Large Compensation I would have been paid to the EF insurance company, which is the insurance company of the FF, if the Defendant had properly received insurance with the accident vehicle using the FF vehicle as a string vehicle. However, according to the records such as the witness D, G's investigation agency and court statement, and the Defendant's investigation agency and court's testimony, it is difficult to find that the Defendant had been aware of the insurance accident after the occurrence of the above accident, and it is difficult to find that the Defendant had been aware of the insurance relationship with the owner of the FF vehicle's family special agreement after the occurrence of the accident, and that it could not be recognized that the Defendant had been aware that the accident had been covered by the insurance policy after the occurrence of the accident, and that it could not be recognized that the Defendant had been aware of the accident.

Thus, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of facts constituting the crime, and thus, the defendant is not guilty under the latter part of Article 325