The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding of the legal doctrine and misunderstanding of the fact that the Defendant was unaware of the fact that the vehicle operated at the time of the instant case (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) was not covered by the mandatory insurance, and thus, the Defendant was intentional at the time of committing the instant crime.

subsection (b) of this section.

In addition, the employee of the competent Gu office or the employee of the insurance company did not inform the defendant that the vehicle may be punished if it is operated on the road that is not covered by mandatory insurance, so the driver of the competent Gu office or the employee of the insurance company did not know that it is punished for the operation of the vehicle that is not covered by mandatory insurance.

2) At the time when an investigative agency prepares a written statement from a defendant, the defendant has the right to refuse to make statements and have the right to assistance of counsel.

did not notify.

Therefore, the written statement prepared by the defendant is an illegally collected evidence and admissible as evidence.

3) As a result of the refusal of consultation by the counsel selected in the lower court, the Defendant infringed on the right to assistance of counsel during the lower court’s trial.

4) The police discovered the fact that the defendant operated a vehicle not covered by the mandatory insurance, without notifying the defendant of the fact that the operation of the vehicle not covered by the mandatory insurance constitutes a crime, and ordered the defendant to continue to operate the vehicle not covered by the mandatory insurance.

Due to such omission by the police, the defendant has been prevented from committing the crime of this case.

As seen above, the defendant did not have the intention to operate a mandatory insurance vehicle, there was a mistake in the law, and the written statement prepared by the defendant is admissible as evidence of illegal collection, which was made without notifying the right to refuse to make statements and the right to assistance of counsel.