If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

The Defendant is a holder of a sealed and loaded freight vehicle B and C sealed freight vehicle.

1. On January 6, 2012, when the Defendant entered into a mandatory insurance policy on January 23:37, 2012, the Defendant: (a) had an employee of the non-indicted employed in D (ju) operated by the Defendant operate B-wing and freight vehicles on the 113 km (on the upper east dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-si).

2. On May 9, 2012, the Defendant entered into a mandatory insurance policy on May 16:5, 2012, and had an employee of the non-employee working for the Defendant (ju) D operated by the Defendant operate the C-wing and cargo vehicle at the entrance near the entrance of the luminous support Ri in the middle of Gwangju.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Inquiry into non-insurance operation vehicles, inquiry into mandatory insurance contracts, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the original register of motor vehicles;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, and Article 46 (2) and (2) and 2 of the Guarantee of Indemnity for Motor Vehicle Damages, the main sentence of Article 8, and the selection of fines;

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. As to the Defendant’s assertion on Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant was subject to a fine for negligence by an administrative authority on the fact that the instant vehicle did not purchase mandatory insurance with respect to the instant vehicle, and thus, the Defendant’s further criminal punishment on the operation of the instant vehicle, which the Defendant did not purchase mandatory insurance, violates the principle of no matter of interest, or the principle of prohibition of double punishment.

However, Article 13(1) of the Constitution prohibits a person who operated an automobile without mandatory insurance under Article 46(2)2 of the Guarantee of Automobile Compensation Act and the imposition of fines for negligence on the owner of an automobile who did not buy mandatory insurance under Article 48(3)1 of the Guarantee of Automobile Compensation Act is different from the act of basic facts subject to punishment or sanction.