The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The defendant stated that the reason for revocation of driver's license of the defendant against the summary of the grounds for appeal was known to the court below that the defendant did not undergo an aptitude test even though one year has passed since the expiration of the period of the aptitude test, and that the defendant was aware that the license

Defendant had received an aptitude test even before, and entered the period of the aptitude test in the driver’s license, and five months after the cancellation of the Defendant’s driver’s license, and the Defendant’s vindication that the Defendant did not know that the Defendant was subject to an aptitude test over a long period of one year and five months after the expiration of the period of the aptitude test for the Defendant and that the Defendant did not know that he was subject to an aptitude test over a long period of one year and five months.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which denied the defendant's intention of driving without a license is erroneous by mistake of facts on the ground that the defendant was old and the cancellation disposition of driver's license against the defendant was not served by public notice.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

(a)be as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

B. (1) Whether a disposition to revoke a driver's license is valid or not) to revoke a driver's license on the grounds that a person who has obtained a driver's license did not have a regular aptitude test, the occurrence of the lapse of the regular aptitude test period alone is insufficient, and the revocation of a driver's license by the commissioner

Even if there is no legitimate notification or announcement pursuant to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, the driver's license cannot be effective for the vehicle driving during the period without such legitimate notification or announcement after the revocation of the driver's license (see Supreme Court Decision 91Do223, Mar. 22, 1991). The term "the location of which is unknown" under Article 93 (3) of the Enforcement Rule refers to the disposition.