The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual errors and misapprehension of the legal principles) is that the Defendant leased the instant vehicle to B, which can be seen as being entrusted with matters concerning the operation, etc. of the instant vehicle by the F, the owner of the instant vehicle, and thus, constitutes “the person entrusted with matters concerning the operation, etc. of the said vehicle by the owner

2. Determination

(a) No person, other than an owner of a motor vehicle or a person entrusted with matters concerning the operation, etc. of a motor vehicle, shall operate the motor vehicle in the indictment of this case;

On November 19, 2015, the Defendant was not entrusted with the matters concerning the operation, etc. of automobiles, etc. by the owner of the said vehicle or the owner of the said vehicle, on the ground that: (a) the Defendant was in the influoral street of Bupyeong-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seoul; and (b) on the basis of a free lease for one year, he/she was in custody by the latter owner of C

Nevertheless, from the above date to March 22:10 on March 20, 2016, the Defendant operated the said car project at the seat of the Sungnam-si branch of Sungnam-si.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged on the ground that the instant vehicle was not a legitimate user of the instant vehicle, in full view of the evidence presented by the lower court, on the ground that, inasmuch as there was no evidence to deem that the instant vehicle was normally entrusted, since the owner provided the instant vehicle as security to the person in poor name and was distributed before and finally operated by the Defendant.

C. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the fact that the Defendant operated the instant vehicle from November 19, 2015 to March 22:10, 2016 is recognized.

However, the following circumstances revealed by the record, i.e., F., the owner of the instant vehicle, providing the instant vehicle as security to the de facto group, and F, the instant vehicle 1.