The judgment of the court below of the first instance shall exclude the crimes of violation of each Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving) due to the driving of motorcycles.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal Nos. 1 and 2 (the first instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years and fines for 300,000 won, and the second instance court’s imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months) are too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the defendant's grounds for appeal prior to the judgment ex officio.

The first and second judgment against the defendant was rendered, and the defendant filed an appeal against the second and second judgment, and this court decided to hold concurrent hearings of the above two appeals cases. Among the judgment of the court of first instance, the part concerning each of the above crimes except for the crimes of violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) following the driving of a motorcycle and the special larceny of the second judgment shall be sentenced to one punishment pursuant to Article 38 (1) 2 of the Criminal Act in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Therefore, the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) following the driving of a motorcycle among the judgment of the court of first instance does not constitute a case where the statutory punishment is a fine and penal detention, and thus, the part concerning each of the above crimes and the second judgment cannot be maintained.

3. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the defendant's error of finding unfair sentencing as to each violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving) by driving a motorcycle is recognized and against his/her own fault. However, even though the defendant was subject to criminal punishment or juvenile protective disposition for the same kind of crime in the past, he/she again committed this part of the crime despite the record of criminal punishment or juvenile protective disposition, the number of the crimes is not significant, and in light of the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

4. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal as to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving) by driving a motorcycle among the judgment of the court of first instance is justified.