Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, as a holder of a sealed truck, is a person who is engaged in the door-to-door transport business using the vehicle.

No owner or user of a private-use truck shall provide or lease his/her private-use truck commercially for transport of cargo, and no person shall operate or possess any motor vehicle which is not covered by mandatory insurance.

【2016 High Court 691】

1. Violation of the trucking transport business Act;

A. On January 6, 2016, from around 12:00 to 14:50, the Defendant carried out a commercial transport business at the point of KGBD located in Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan City to the front end of the same Gu building without permission from the Mayor/Do governor, by means of transporting goods to B for private use and receiving fees from the head of the branch of KGBD D.

B. On January 12, 2016, around 15:00, the Defendant carried out commercial transport by means of transporting goods to the said truck and receiving commission from the head of the branch office of KGB D, without permission of the Mayor/Do governor, from "KGB D branch located in Dong-gu, U.S. to the front side of the F building in Ilyang-gu, U.S., U.S., Dong-gu, U.S., U.S. to the high end of the F building.

2. The Defendant in violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Damage Compensation Act operated each of the above 1. B wing vehicles, which were not covered by mandatory insurance.

【2016 High Court 692】

3. On March 15, 2016, the Defendant violated the Trucking Transport Business Act, from around 11:00 to around 15:00 of the same day, carried out a commercial transport by means of transporting the KGB’s door-to-door distribution of goods from the G building in Yongsan-gu, Seoul Metropolitan City to H from the G building in Goyang-si to the G building, and receiving approximately KRW 1.5 million average monthly fee from the head of the branch office of KGBD D.

4. The Defendant violated the Guarantee of Automobile Damage Compensation Act: (a) operated the above wing truck, which was not covered by mandatory insurance at the time and place specified in paragraph (3).

【2016 High Court 693】

5. On March 29, 2016, the Defendant violated the Guarantee of Automobile Compensation Act: On March 29, 2016, the Defendant is not more than the same Sung-dong, Sinsan-dong, Sinyang-si.