The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. On June 10, 2016, the Defendant: (a) driven a two-wheeled vehicle with DB400 wheels without obtaining a two-wheeled vehicle driver’s license on the road in front of the wife population C at the time of Gyeonggi-si, Gyeonggi-do (hereinafter referred to as “B40C”); and (b) driven a two-wheeled vehicle.

2. Determination

A. In a criminal trial, the finding of guilt must be based on evidence of probative value, which leads a judge to the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt.

If the prosecutor's proof does not reach such a level of conviction, even if there are suspicions of guilt, it cannot be determined with the benefit of the defendant.

B. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserts that driving of a two-wheeled vehicle at one hour specified in the facts charged in the instant case is not the Defendant but E.

(c)

Around the day specified in the facts charged in the instant case, F, who observed a driving plane of the instant two-wheeled vehicle, stated that the said driver of the instant two-wheeled vehicle is the Defendant in an investigative agency and in this law.

(d)

However, even based on CCTV images in which the front page was recorded, it is impossible for the driver of the instant two-wheeled vehicle to be the Defendant. ② G in which both the Defendant and E are aware, stated in this court that “The two people have flickly followed the two people, and the figures belonging to CCTV appear to be the same as E”, and ③ E also owned and operated the instant two-wheeled vehicle in investigation police officers and currency.

In light of the facts stated in the statement (in 36 pages of the investigation record), it is difficult to believe the above F’s statement as it is, and otherwise, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone to prove the facts charged of this case without any reasonable doubt.

It is difficult to see it.

E. Thus, the facts charged of this case constitute a time when there is no proof of facts constituting the crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted by the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment is publicly announced under Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act.