Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

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

Criminal facts

The Defendant is a person who engages in the business of removing defects in a vehicle under the trade name “D” at the seat of Jeju City.

Any person who intends to operate a motor vehicle management business shall register with the head of Si/Gun/Gu, as prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land

Nevertheless, from February 201 to August 28, 2015, the Defendant, within the 12th workplace of “D”’s trade name from around February 2011 to around August 28, 2015, without lawful procedures, carried out a seal work by having the equipment, such as propagation necessary for painting work, sand trading machine, painting sprayers, etc. equipped with the surface of the entire area of the “F” EF vehicle, which is requested by the general public E, with a spread and slick the surface, and then spraying the paint with the painting for painting. The Defendant carried out a seal work on an average of 15 cases per month by the same method, such as carrying out the painting work on the front and rear part of the vehicle, and the back part of the vehicle of “H”.

Accordingly, the defendant is running the unregistered maintenance business.

Summary of Evidence

1. A witness I and each legal statement of the J;

1. A written accusation;

1. A statement of detection;

1. On-site photographs;

1. A certificate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing recording records;

1. Relevant Article of the Automobile Management Act and the choice of punishment concerning facts constituting an offense: Article 79 subparagraph 13 of the said Act and Articles 53 (1) of the said Act and the selection of fines;

1. Detention at a workhouse: Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Provisional payment order: Judgment on the issues of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. As to whether a written accusation, on-site photograph, etc. constitutes illegally collected evidence

A. Article 308-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that “No evidence collected in violation of the due process shall be admitted as evidence.” In principle, not only the evidence collected by the investigative agency, but also the secondary evidence obtained based on this cannot be admitted as evidence for conviction.

However, the actual contents of the due process of the violation of the investigation agency.