[1] Whether the act of attaching a registration number plate of a certain motor vehicle to another motor vehicle constitutes an unlawful use of the registration number plate by itself (affirmative)

[2] The case holding that a motor vehicle registration number plate is attached to another motor vehicle and it does not operate the motor vehicle, and it constitutes illegal use under Article 71 of the Motor Vehicle Management Act

[1] Articles 71 and 78 subparag. 2 of the Automobile Management Act / [2] Articles 71 and 78 subparag. 2 of the Automobile Management Act

[1] Supreme Court Decision 96Do3319 delivered on July 8, 1997 (Gong1997Ha, 2435)

Defendant

Defendant

Daejeon District Court Decision 2006No844 Decided July 14, 2006

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Illegal use of a motor vehicle registration number plate under Article 71 of the Automobile Management Act refers to the act that a person without authority uses the motor vehicle registration number plate made lawfully by a person without authority or by abuse of authority even if the person with authority uses it (see Supreme Court Decision 96Do3319, Jul. 8, 1997). The attachment of a registration number plate to another motor vehicle constitutes an unlawful use of the motor vehicle registration number plate solely because it causes the misunderstanding of the identity of the motor vehicle to the general public.

In light of the above legal principles, the judgment of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no violation of law by misunderstanding the legal principles. The purport of the grounds of appeal is that since a registration number plate was attached and operated, it does not constitute illegal use as provided in Article 71 of the Automobile Management Act since it was not operated. However, if a registration number plate was attached and operated on another motor vehicle, the crime of uttering of illegal use air defense as provided in Article 238 (2) of the Criminal Act can be established separately (see the above Supreme Court Decision). It does not constitute an illegal use as provided in Article 71 of the Automobile Management Act even if a motor vehicle is operated separately from the attachment as alleged in the grounds of appeal. Thus, the first

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Shin Hyun-chul (Presiding Justice)