The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is that the court below acquitted the defendant on the ground that the act of offering commercial transport by the defendant using the private cars of this case does not constitute a crime which is inevitably expected to be repeated, and thus, it is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the business crime, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, even though the court below judged the act of offering commercial transport by the defendant of this case as a business crime and has a relation with

2. Where a summary order has become final and conclusive with respect to a part of the crimes which are related to a single comprehensive crime subject to judgment, a judgment of acquittal shall be rendered against the previous crimes on the basis of the time when the summary order is issued, and the subsequent crimes shall be punished as one crime; and

(2) In light of the above legal principles and records, the Defendant’s act of transporting the above vehicle to the passenger on September 19, 201, and the Defendant’s act of transporting the private car to the passenger on December 28, 201 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Do1318, Aug. 9, 1994). According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant: (a) on December 28, 201, issued a summary order on September 18, 201, which became final and conclusive on September 19, 201 by taking advantage of the summary order on September 18, 201 to 3,00 won; and (b) on September 19, 201, the Defendant was subject to a fine not exceeding 200 won for transportation among the passengers; and (c) on September 20, 200, the Defendant was subject to a summary order issued on September 20, 2011.