The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as to the place where the Defendant was driving without a license on June 27, 2013 is located in Gwangju City where the real estate brokerage office for the Defendant’s operation is located (hereinafter “instant vacant lot”), and such place cannot be deemed as a “road” as prescribed by the Road Traffic Act.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the term “road” in Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Road Traffic Act means a road under the Road Act, a toll road under the Toll Road Act, an agricultural and fishing village road under the Act on the Maintenance of Road in Agricultural and Fishing Villages, and other places where it is necessary to ensure safe and smooth traffic of unspecified persons or motor vehicles and horses.

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., the commercial buildings including the real estate brokerage office operated by the defendant are located in (-) and the vacant lots are located in front of each commercial building, and each of the above vacant lots is connected to the Gwangju City J (hereinafter "Road"), which is used as a road, ② there is no separate boundary mark between the above vacant lots and the passage roads in this case, and no structure or blocking is installed to control access, and ③ there is no sign prohibiting access, ③ if a vehicle parked along the passage of this case, it can be seen as being used as the passage of the vehicle without any restriction by each of the above vacant lots (Evidence No. 33).