The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant, by misapprehending the legal principles, was convicted of the facts constituting a crime that he/she engaged in a motor vehicle trade without registration from January 1, 2011 to July 18, 2014, and received a final judgment (Seoul District Court Decision 2016No. 324, 2016, 16, 2016, 2016, and 1646, hereinafter “existing final judgment”), and the transfer of the said motor vehicle trade without registration included the transfer of the said non-registered motor vehicle trade, and thus, res judicata effect of the said judgment extends to the instant case.

Therefore, even though the judgment of acquittal should be rendered, the judgment of the court below which rendered the judgment of acquittal is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (2 million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of misunderstanding of the facts and legal principles, the facts constituting the crime of the existing final and conclusive judgment can be acknowledged that "the defendant engaged in the automobile sales business by means of trading 647 motor vehicles from January 1, 201 to July 18, 2014 (applicable Article 79: Articles 13 and 53 (1) of the former Automobile Management Act)" is "where the defendant intends to re-transfer the acquired motor vehicle to a third party, he/she shall make a transfer registration in his/her name before transfer (applicable Article 80 subparagraph 2 of the former Automobile Management Act: Articles 80 subparagraph 2 and 12 (3) of the former Automobile Management Act); although the defendant transferred a motor vehicle with bmw645 square meters in his/her name without a transfer registration on February 5, 2014 (Article 80 subparagraph 2 of the former Automobile Management Act). Thus, even if the above final judgment contains the purport that the previous criminal facts of the final judgment and conclusive judgment of this case.