Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

No motor vehicle which is not covered by mandatory insurance shall be operated on a road.

Nevertheless, at around 10:10 on November 15, 2012, the Defendant operated a Maz passenger car not covered by mandatory insurance on the front side of the Bag-dong, Seojin-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on mandatory insurance;

1. Relevant Article 46 (2) 2 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, and the main sentence of Article 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act and the selection of fines;

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

1. The dismissal part of the prosecution under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendant, at around 10:10 on November 15, 2012, driven a B M& car and proceeded ahead of the Dog-Jak-gu, Seojin-gu, Seojin-gu, Seoul, with its driving on the Dog-Jak-gu (Seoul), from the New Middle School, to the Dog-gu Skdong.

In such cases, the defendant who drives a motor vehicle has a duty of care to safely drive the front side and the left side and to prevent accidents from smoke.

Nevertheless, due to the mistake of driving the vehicle by neglecting it, the Defendant shacked the right side of the victim C (Ap. 30 years old) driving on the left side of the course direction into the left side of the vehicle of the Defendant.

At the same time, the Defendant suffered injury to the above victim, such as “brain sugar,” which requires two weeks’ medical treatment due to the above occupational negligence, and at the same time damaged the damaged vehicle’s repair cost of KRW 1,953,420.

2. This part of the facts charged is a crime falling under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Article 151 of the Road Traffic Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under the main sentence of Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concern

However, on December 17, 2012, prior to the instant indictment, the victim submitted a written agreement to the effect that mutual agreement was reached on the injury and physical damage.