The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. On May 20, 2018, when police officers belonging to the Seoul Seocho Police Station for the traffic safety department around the Seoul Seocho Police Station kept the registration number plate of the B body-man vehicle owned by the Defendant on the grounds of the delinquency of various administrative fines in payment of administrative fines in the vicinity of the Seoul Seocho Police Station, the address of the Defendant presented by the above police station is "Seoul Jongno-gu E" and is different from the "Seoul Jongno-gu F", which is the actual address of the Defendant. Despite these circumstances, the lower judgment that held that the Defendant violated the Automobile Management Act is unjust.

2. The defendant's above assertion of judgment is without merit, and its grounds are as follows.

The gist of the instant criminal facts is that “the Defendant requested the business entity manufacturing the mutual influent signboards located in Ansan-si from July 19, 2018 to August 19, 2018 during the period from August 2018, and forged the registration number plate of the said vehicle, attached the forged registration number plate to the said vehicle, and used the said registration number plate forged by operating the said vehicle,” and, in other words, the circumstance that the Defendant’s address and the actual address presented by the police at the time of the custody of the registration number plate of the said vehicle are different does not interfere with the establishment of the crime of violation of the Automobile Management Act, and thus, the illegality of the crime of violating the Automobile Management Act and the responsibility of the Defendant cannot be seen as falling under the tort of the Automobile Management Act and the responsibility of the Defendant.

B. The provisional disposition of this case was taken because the defendant did not pay various fines for negligence, and even if the address and the actual address of the defendant known by the competent administrative agency are different, the defendant was not notified of the imposition of various fines for negligence by the competent administrative agency.

However, as long as the defendant is recognized to commit various offenses, it can be seen that the imposition of various fines for negligence itself is illegal.