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

On March 24, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. at the Jung-gu District Court on April 1, 2017, and the judgment became final and conclusive.

The Defendant is a holder of BLastastafol vehicle.

No automobile which is not covered by the mandatory insurance shall be operated on a road.

Nevertheless, at around 18:12 on May 4, 2013, the Defendant appears to have been at the front of the D station located in Dong-gu, Dong-gu, 2015, F on January 15, 2015, F on the front roads located in Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, Gyeonggi-do, Seoul, about 09:40 on January 28, 2015, at around 3:4 times on February 12:35, 2015, the Defendant deemed to have been at least four times in total, including 4:00,00,00 in the bill of indictment, “ January 2, 2007” to have a clerical error in the “ January 2, 2008.” Thus, it is recognized that the Defendant’s right of defense is not substantially identical to the charges.

Since then, the above automobile was operated without mandatory insurance.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The mandatory insurance contract is a power aid, non-insurance operation vehicle, and the register of automobiles;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report criminal records, references to criminal records, dispositions not before the disposition, and results of confirmation;

1. Article 46(2)2 of the Act on the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation and Article 8 of the former Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (Amended by Act No. 12987, Jan. 6, 2015); the main text of Article 8 (Unlicensed Driving on May 4, 2013); Article 46(2)2 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act; the main text of Article 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act; and the selection of fines.

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act dealing with concurrent crimes;

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

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

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order, and the fact that the defendant recognizes all the criminal facts of this case and reflects his mistake, and the judgment in its holding.