The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Although the defendant had not operated the vehicle of this case, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principle and affected the conclusion of the judgment.

The punishment (fine 700,000 won) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

Judgment

According to the records of ex officio determination: (a) the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for fraud, etc. at the Jung-gu District Court on April 4, 2013 and the said judgment became final and conclusive on April 12, 2013; (b) on May 29, 2014, the Seoul High Court sentenced two years of suspended execution to one year of imprisonment for occupational embezzlement, etc. at the Seoul High Court on May 29, 2014; (c) on October 24, 2014, the said judgment was sentenced to two years of suspended sentence for occupational embezzlement by the Seoul Southern District Court on June 15, 2015 and the said judgment became final and conclusive on January 15, 2015; and (d) each of the crimes of this case, which became final and conclusive, are both related to latter concurrent crimes under Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and ought to be determined after examining whether to grant reduction of or exemption from punishment, taking into account the case of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act and equity.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction.

Article 46(2) of the former Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (amended by Act No. 11369, Feb. 22, 2012; hereinafter “former Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act”) provides a punishment for motor vehicle owners who operate a motor vehicle not covered by mandatory insurance in violation of the main sentence of Article 8 of the same Act.

Here, the term "operation" means the operation of a motor vehicle by social norms to the benefit of the operation.