Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 2.5 million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

Around February 8, 2017, the Defendant owned BKaman-si car, and operated the said vehicle not covered by mandatory insurance in a section of about 20 km from the Do to the 286 front of the 15:20 km-gun, Incheon Cheongjin-gun, Seoul, to the 286 front of the Do to the 20 km-gu Do.

The defendant of "2017 High Court 367" is a holder of BKanja car.

On January 15, 2017, the Defendant operated the said car that was not covered by mandatory insurance on the front side of the Gu, Seosan-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City around 09:35.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

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

1. Relevant Article 46 (2) 2 and the main sentence of Article 8 of the Guarantee of Compensation for Motor Vehicle Damages, and the choice of fines, respectively, concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The Defendant, on the grounds of sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, has the record of having been sentenced to respective fines in 2010, 2011 and 2013 for the same crime.

Even though the defendant committed the crime of 2017 and 367, as stated in the judgment of the court, he committed the crime of 2017 and 2017 and 340, respectively.

As such, it is doubtful that the Defendant repeatedly commits the same kind of crime, and even if there are many fines, there is a concern about whether it is against the truth, and it is likely to repeat the crime.

Rather, it is reasonable to select imprisonment in order to prevent the defendant from repeating the crime.

Although it is judged, it is inevitable to impose a fine due to the prohibition of disadvantageous change in the application for formal trial which has many criticism.

However, it shall be stated in the written judgment that the defendant's severe punishment through a regular trial is deemed necessary, not to be completed under a summary order when re-offending a crime.