A. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that sentenced the Defendant to a fine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, even though the facts charged against the Defendant are only subject to the imposition of a fine for negligence by an administrative agency.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Legal principles 1) The former Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (amended by Act No. 9450, Feb. 6, 2009; hereinafter “former Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act”) which had been enforced on the date and time limit of the instant facts charged.

Article 5 provides for an automobile owner's obligation to subscribe to insurance, etc. as shown in the attached Form. Article 8 provides that "No motor vehicle shall be operated on the road," and Article 46 (2) of the same Act provides that "any motor vehicle owner who operates a motor vehicle which is not covered by mandatory insurance in violation of the main sentence of Article 8 shall be punished by imprisonment with labor for not more than one year or by a fine not exceeding five million won," and Article 48 (3) 1 of the same Act provides that "any person who fails to subscribe to mandatory insurance under Article 5 (1) through (3) shall be punished by a fine not exceeding three million won."

B. The Defendant is driving a motor vehicle with the date and place stated in the instant charges of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents in 2010 and the Road Traffic Act.

(c)an injury to people;