The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On January 31, 2015, the Defendant, at the Daegu-gu dong-gu Seoul-gu dong-gu dong-gu dong-gu (hereinafter “Seoul-gu dong-gu”).

2. The prosecutor of the judgment submitted a written request for a trial, an investigation report, etc. as evidence of the facts charged in the instant case.

However, the above evidence alone can only be acknowledged that the defendant was found to have not paid a penalty of KRW 50,00 by the second payment deadline even after being discovered on January 31, 2015 due to the act of in-service under Article 3 (1) 39 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, and the defendant was proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the facts charged that "the defendant did not pay a penalty of KRW 50,000 within the second payment deadline" at the time and place above.

It is insufficient to see otherwise, and there is no other evidence to prove this (the actual amount of damage is unclear so far). Thus, since the facts charged in this case constitutes a case where there is no evidence of a crime, the defendant cannot obtain the consent of the defendant since he did not appear on the sentencing date, the public announcement of the judgment of innocence pursuant to the proviso of Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act is not ordered, since it constitutes a case where the defendant cannot obtain the consent of the defendant.