The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

The gist of the prosecutor's appeal is that the court below's punishment (3 million won in penalty) is too unfluent and unfair.

In this case, it is recognized that the defendant led to confession and reflects the crime of this case.

However, the Defendant has already been punished five times due to the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving), and the Defendant repeatedly engages in driving without a license even though he does not have the right to obtain a driver's license, and taking into account the Defendant's age, sex, environment, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., as a whole, various sentencing factors specified in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant's age, sexual behavior, and environment, and the process and result of the instant crime, the prosecutor's assertion is reasonable, since the lower court's punishment is too uneasible and unfair.

Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is reasonable, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows after pleading.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is identical to the description of each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 152 of the relevant Act and Articles 152 subparagraph 1 and 43 of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of punishment for a crime, and the selection of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act on the community service order;