도로교통법위반(무면허운전)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to the gist of the grounds for appeal, the defendant can sufficiently be recognized as having known that the license was revoked at the time of the instant case
Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case on the ground that the defendant had no intention to drive without a license. The court below erred by mistake of fact.
2. The lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on the instant facts charged while sufficiently explaining the grounds for its determination.
Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the record, it was proved that the defendant had had the intention to drive without a license at the time of the instant case without any reasonable doubt.
As it is difficult to view the facts charged in this case to the same purport, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the facts alleged by the prosecutor.
On the other hand, the Supreme Court Decision 2002Do4203 Decided October 22, 2002 presented by the prosecutor differs from the case in the following cases: (a) the period from the cancellation of the license to the act of driving at issue; (b) the possession of the driver’s license at the time of the pertinent act of driving; and (c) the conditions before and after the previous act of driving, etc. related to the power that did not undergo the aptitude
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.