The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Legal principles stipulate that an act of driving a bicycle without obtaining a license for bicycle riding under the Road Traffic Act shall be punished by a fine not exceeding 300,000 won or by misdemeanor imprisonment. The judgment below erred by omitting a fine or penal detention to be imposed concurrently on the defendant by sentencing a single imprisonment with prison labor as to the driving of a bicycle without a license for a bicycle riding device among each of the crimes in the instant case.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, community service hours, 80 hours, and 40 hours of compliance driving) is deemed unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Of the facts charged in the instant case as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the Defendant’s driving of a motor device under the influence of alcohol without a driver’s license constitutes a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving without a license) and a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving without a license). Both crimes are concurrent crimes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 86Do2731, Feb. 24, 1987). According to Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act, punishment provided for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving without a license) with heavy punishment.

Therefore, as long as the court below selects to punish the defendant for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving without a license), the defendant cannot be concurrently sentenced to a fine or penal detention as provided for in the above crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act. Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as alleged by the prosecutor.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

B. Each of the instant crimes with regard to determining the illegality of sentencing is the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, such as that the Defendant driven a motor vehicle with no license under the influence of alcohol, and that the nature of the crime is not weak, and that the Defendant has been punished several times due to a non-licenseless driving crime.

However, the fact that the defendant reflects the wrong, and that the defendant has no record of being sentenced to punishment exceeding the fine since 1993, etc.