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

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

Punishment of the crime

No automobile which is not covered by mandatory insurance shall be operated on a road.

Nevertheless, at around 22:50 on July 2, 2014, the Defendant operated B-Co trucking trucks that did not subscribe to mandatory insurance from the side of the “redibrog angle” to the Han-gu Hospital with a long distance road without the front signal, etc. in the Nam-gu Seoul Metropolitan City.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on mandatory insurance;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, and the main sentence of Article 46 (2) 2 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act and the main sentence of Article 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order include the fact that the defendant repents the erroneousness of the defendant and reflects it against the defendant, and that the defendant has no criminal power other than two times prior to and after the penalty of this kind, etc., which are favorable to the defendant, and the legislative intent of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (the purpose of promoting the sound development of automobile transport by establishing a system guaranteeing compensation for damage in the event that a person is dead, injured, or property is destroyed or damaged due to the operation of a motor vehicle). The purpose of this Act is to promote the sound development of automobile transport by protecting the victim and preventing social loss caused by the accident of the motor vehicle). In full view of all the circumstances that the defendant operated a motor vehicle which has not subscribed to the mandatory payment order of this case, including the circumstances leading to the operation of the motor vehicle

Public Prosecution Rejection Parts

1. The summary of this part of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a person who drives Brocco trucks.

On July 2, 2014, the Defendant driving the said vehicle as his duties around 22:50, and driving it at a remote distance without a front signal, etc., located in the Southern-gu of Gwangju, Nam-gu, shall be at a speed of the U.S. on the surface of the Han-gu Hospital, from the “redibrog angle.”