석유및석유대체연료사업법위반
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) is difficult to deem that the Defendant intentionally sold or stored oil below the quality standards for sale, and thus, acquitted the Defendant of the charges of this case. However, according to the Defendant’s oil tank management status, etc., it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant was aware that the oil mixed with water was sold to consumers, and thus, the lower court erred in matters of mistake
2. Determination
A. The Defendant in the instant charges is a petroleum retailer operating the “E gas station” in Young-gun D.
No petroleum retailer shall sell or store petroleum products that fail to meet the quality standards for sale.
1) At around 20:00 on October 26, 2014, the Defendant sold 63 liters for automobiles, which did not meet the quality standards of F with 6.5% water and f.01%, to F. 108,000 won. (2) On November 3, 2014, the Defendant kept 20D/M (4,000 liters) for the purpose of selling the gasoline for automobiles, the water and sed water of which do not meet the quality standards of 0.01% at the above E station.
B. The lower court rendered a not guilty verdict on the instant facts charged, stating the detailed reasons from Part II to Part IV to Part IV.
C. The following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the legal principles as stated below, and evidence duly adopted and examined by the original court and the court of the trial, i.e., the following facts and circumstances, i., (e., (i) even if an administrative regulation is the main subject thereof, if there is an express provision or interpretation, and it is clear that criminal negligence is punishable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do1878, Nov. 13, 2014). (ii) Articles 45 subparag. 5 and 27 of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act, which are applicable provisions to the facts charged in the instant case, may be punished by intention in accordance with the principle of the Criminal Act.