The defendant shall be exempted from punishment.

Punishment of the crime

On July 15, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months for violating the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 23, 2014.

On November 1, 2013, the defendant's refusal to take a drinking test was required to take a drinking test on the grounds that there is a considerable reason to suspect that he/she had driven a drinking alcohol on the ground that the defendant's face is red, smelled from the slope of the police officer working in the service in the Yancheon Police Station D Zone D District, which called out after receiving a report of a traffic accident that caused a collision with the street safety zone boundary in the south-gu,Ycheon-gu,Ycheon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City with a car from Cadon-do, and the defendant called out after receiving a report of a traffic accident that caused a collision with a vehicle with C, and he/she did not comply with

B. The Defendant is the owner of a vehicle with a non- mandatory insurance policy, which is an owner of a vehicle with a half-to-face lurged vehicle in Paragraph A.

No one shall operate any motor vehicle which is not covered by mandatory insurance, etc. on a road.

Nevertheless, on November 1, 2013, the Defendant, without purchasing mandatory insurance, operated the foregoing vehicle in the area of non-insurance, which was operated on the local highway of 927 local highway in Ycheon-gun, Chungcheongnamcheon-gun, Chungcheongnamcheon-do around 04:40.

Summary of Evidence

1. The legal statement of witness E (the statement that he/she was driving from the defendant);

1. Statement made by the police against F (statement made by the defendant that the defendant was driving);

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Photographs of CCTV for crime prevention (the photograph of a photograph taken by the defendant in the form of driving);

1. Previous convictions: The defendant and his defense counsel merely left the scene of the accident and did not drive the vehicle. However, considering the above evidence, the fact that the defendant driven the vehicle stated in the judgment can be acknowledged.

On the other hand, G stated that the defendant is coming from the other side of the accident in this court, but at the time the defendant was at the time.