Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

Punishment of the crime

No motor vehicle shall be operated unless the owner or possessor of the motor vehicle is entrusted with the operation of the motor vehicle.

Nevertheless, the Defendant violated the Automobile Management Act by operating the said vehicle on the roads of the new service distance in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, on October 28, 2016, even though there was no fact that the Defendant was entrusted with the operation of the vehicle by D from D, the owner of the last vehicle in C, and there was no fact that D had met.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Response to a request for cooperation in investigation (to the voice of Chungcheongbuk-do);

1. Around February 2016, the Defendant, along with the documents attached to the police interrogation protocol (around February 2016, the aforementioned evidence revealed that the Defendant transferred his/her claim to a vehicle to his/her name from a person without his/her name, and operated a vehicle with a 3 million won car with the documents (a used vehicle sales contract, a borrowed money certificate, a power of attorney for the transfer of a vehicle, a letter of consent for the transfer of a vehicle, a certificate of vehicle use approval/ a waiver of a vehicle).

However, the above documents received by the defendant are affixed only with the name and seal of the nominal owner D, and the important legal details are not supplemented, and the certificate of seal imprint necessary for the registration of transfer of ownership has expired as of August 7, 2012, and thus the registration of transfer was impossible.

In addition, on the original register of automobile registration, multiple registrations have been entered, and the said vehicle is already reported as a large lane by D around March 27, 2014 ( January 29, 2016). D stated in the instant court that the said vehicle was not lawfully entrusted to operate the said vehicle, and the Defendant did not have any contact with D at the time of delivery of the vehicle.

In full view of the foregoing circumstances and the intent of the establishment of new regulations on the Automobile Management Act, the defendant does not entrust the said vehicle with legitimate operation of the nominal owner.