[2] Whether “a case where a driver is granted a driver’s license but the validity of a driver’s license is suspended later” is naturally included in the ordinary meaning of the legal words “out obtaining a driver’s license” (negative)

[3] The case affirming the judgment below holding that the above act does not constitute a violation of Article 154 subparagraph 2 of the Road Traffic Act and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act, in case where the defendant driving a motorcycle "under the condition of suspending the validity of the driver's license" and was prosecuted for violating the Road Traffic Act

[2] Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act prohibits a driver without a driver's license provides that "no person shall drive a motor vehicle, etc. where the driver's license is not obtained from the Commissioner of the Local Police Agency or the validity of the driver's license is suspended under the provisions of Article 80, and separates cases where the driver's license is not obtained or the validity of the driver's license is suspended due to the driver's prohibition and is on an equal basis. Thus, it cannot be interpreted that "the driver's license is obtained, and the validity of the driver's license is suspended after it is suspended

[3] The case affirming the judgment below which acquitted a person who drives a motorcycle without obtaining a driver's license in violation of the provisions of Article 80, while Article 154 subparagraph 2 of the Road Traffic Act provides that "the person who drives a motorcycle without obtaining a driver's license in violation of the provisions of Article 80, and drives the motorcycle without obtaining a driver's license in case where the driver's license is suspended after the driver's license is interpreted under the ordinary meaning of Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act, and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act provides that "the person who drives the motorcycle without obtaining a driver's license is subject to the suspension of the validity of the driver's license," and Article 154 subparagraph 2 of the Road Traffic Act provides that "the person who drives the motorcycle without obtaining a driver's license in violation of the provisions of Article 80 and without obtaining a driver's license in case of operating the motorcycle under the suspension of the validity of the driver's license does not constitute a violation of Article 154 subparagraph 2 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act.

The principle of no punishment without the law requires that a crime and punishment shall be prescribed by law in order to protect individual freedom and rights from the arbitrary exercise of the state penal authority. In light of such purport, the interpretation of the penal law shall be strict, and an excessively expanded interpretation or analogical interpretation of the meaning of the express penal law in the direction unfavorable to the defendant is not permitted as it is against the principle of no punishment without the law (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 92Do1428, Oct. 13, 1992; Supreme Court Decision 2003Do6535, Feb. 27, 2004).

The court below held that the act of driving a motorcycle under the suspension of driver's license does not constitute an element of Article 154 subparagraph 2 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act, and determined that this part of the facts charged is not an offense. In other words, Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act provides that "no person shall drive a motor vehicle unless a driver's license is obtained from the commissioner of a district police agency or when the validity of a driver's license is suspended under the provisions of Article 80," and stipulates that "no person shall drive a motor vehicle, etc., if the driver's license is suspended under the provisions of Article 80, or when the driver's license is suspended under the provisions of Article 80." Thus, it cannot be interpreted that "the driver's license is suspended, but the validity of the driver's license is suspended under the provisions of Article 152 subparagraph 1 and 2 of the Road Traffic Act without obtaining a driver's license, and the provision of Article 152 subparagraph 4 of the Road Traffic Act provides that the driver's license shall not be punished under the provisions of Article 30.

In light of the above principles of interpretation of penal provisions, the above determination by the court below is justifiable. On the other hand, the ground of appeal that the court below erred in interpreting the provisions of the Road Traffic Act cannot be accepted.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Ji-hyung (Presiding Justice)