Since the crime of violation of Article 152 subparagraph 1 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act is established only when a person drives a motor vehicle with knowledge that there is no valid driver's license, even if a person drives a motor vehicle with the previous driver's license is revoked, it cannot be deemed as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (free driver's license) unless the driver is aware of the cancellation of license, and the police authority has issued a legitimate public notice in lieu of the notice of

Even if so, it cannot be readily concluded that the driver was aware of the fact that the driver was revoked, and in each case, whether the driver was aware of such circumstances should be determined specifically and individually by taking into account the following factors: (a) the reason for revocation of the license and the severity of the illegal act that became grounds for revocation; (b) the existence of the record of having been revoked for the same reason; (c) the reason for not being notified of the disposition on revocation; (d) the length of the period from the revocation to the driving act at issue after the revocation; and

(see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do6480, Dec. 10, 2004). The Defendant, from an investigative agency to this court, exceeded one year without undergoing an aptitude test (Renewal) from the date following the expiry date from April 7, 2012 to October 6, 2012, his/her period of aptitude test from April 7, 2012 to the date following the expiration date from October 6, 2012, the Defendant issued a driver’s license on October 8, 2013 by the Commissioner of Jeju Provincial Police Agency after the public notice period on August 8, 2013 to the date from August 8, 2013 to the date from August 21, 2013.