The judgment below

The part of the violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the driverless driving of a motorcycle is excluded.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The lower court upheld the first instance judgment convicting the Defendant by applying Article 5-4(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (hereinafter “Aggravated Punishment, etc.”) and Articles 329, 331(2), and 342 of the Criminal Act with respect to habitual larceny among the facts charged in the instant case.

However, after the judgment of the court below was rendered, the Constitutional Court sentenced the portion concerning Article 329 of the Criminal Act among Article 5-4 (1) of the Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment Act (the Constitutional Court Decision 2014Hun-Ga16, Feb. 26, 2015). Accordingly, the above provision of the Act was retroactively invalidated pursuant to Article 47 (3) of the Constitutional Court Act.

The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged was no longer maintained, since the defendant's case which was prosecuted by applying the relevant provision of the law in case where the punishment law or the provision of the law becomes retroactively null and void due to the decision of unconstitutionality.

2. According to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act as to the violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the driving of a motorcycle without license, an appeal on the ground of unfair sentencing is allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed. Thus, the argument that the sentencing of a sentence on the violation of the Road Traffic Act due to the driving of a motorcycle without license for a motorcycle for which the Defendant was sentenced to

3. The court below held that the crime of this case committed a violation of the Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment Act (thief) and the violation of the Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment Act (thief) with respect to which the part of the above Act which rendered a decision of unconstitutionality was applied among the crimes of this case and the remaining crimes are all inclusive.