The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is the owner of Cone Star Co., Ltd.

Nevertheless, at around 02:42 on October 24, 2009, the Defendant operated the said van, which was not covered by mandatory insurance in front of the Domari Village at the 38-2 of Yongsan-gu Seoul, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, on March 26, 201, on the 51-51 front of the Dori-si, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, on the 26th 201, on the 51-51 front of the Dori-si, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, and on the 9th 14:12 on May 9, 2012, respectively.

2. The Defendant asserts to the effect that he was unaware of the fact that he was neither a holder of the said van nor a driver, and was unaware of the fact that he was not insured.

Article 46(2) of the former Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (amended by Act No. 11369, Feb. 22, 2012) provides that “A person who operates an automobile not covered by mandatory insurance in violation of the main sentence of Article 8 shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than one year or by a fine not exceeding five million won.” Article 2 subparag. 3 of the same Act defines “the owner of an automobile as “the owner of an automobile or a person who has the right to use the automobile for himself/herself” and Article 2 subparag. 4 of the same Act defines “the driver” as “the person who is engaged in the operation of an automobile for another person or the assistance to the operation of the automobile for himself/herself,” and thus, the owner of the automobile did not directly drive the automobile.

Even if other drivers operate a motor vehicle not covered by mandatory insurance, the owner of the motor vehicle should be deemed to have violated the law.

As to the instant case, the Defendant, in the course of the investigation by Guro-gu Office, was to the effect that “The Defendant was not aware of the fact that the said passenger car was not insured since she was engaged in trade insurance.”