The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case even though the Defendant did not intentionally purchase a motor vehicle mandatory insurance, by misapprehending the substance of the grounds for appeal, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (the amount of 500,000 won) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below on the assertion of misunderstanding of the legal principles, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant purchased a BKaman II motor vehicle (hereinafter “the instant motor vehicle”) with a heavy lane in 2010 and operated the instant motor vehicle as shown in the annexed crime list of the judgment of the court below since around that time, and the defendant did not know about the mandatory insurance of the motor vehicle, merely because the circumstance that the defendant was not properly aware of the fact or misapprehension of the legal principles is merely a site of the law, and therefore, the defendant’s mistake or misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

It is recognized that the defendant has no record of punishment for the same crime.

However, there are no special circumstances to change the period and frequency of operation of a vehicle in which the mandatory insurance is not mandatory, and there is no special circumstance between the court below and the sentence.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's improper assertion of sentencing is without merit.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so ordered as per Disposition.