(b) A ferry in violation of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act;

(c) Violation of the Specialized Credit Finance Business Act;

2.(c) B

3.b. c. C.

Attorney E

1. The summary of the facts charged in this case is as follows.

A. Defendant A using a mobile card terminal borrowed from B, C, etc. on January 6, 2009

From May 8, 2009 to 137 times as shown in the list of crimes in attached Form 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance.

To purchase a total of 1,540,585 litresponding farmers in the Si/Gu/Pacific City.

After doing so, approximately 70% of them shall be supplied to farmers with duty-free transit equivalent to 1,078,409 liters;

purchase of tax exemption equivalent to about 30% of 462,175 liters from farmers and oil not paid in name.

He disposed of to the operator and run the unregistered petroleum sales business.

B. Defendant B: (a) from January 6, 2009 to May 8, 2009, Defendant B operated to A.

A lend a mobile card terminal, and cause A to do so at a farm, such as Goyang-si.

No. 1 to 42 Tax Exemptions by using the Cock Card exclusively for farmers to purchase tax-free transit

The credit service provider shall pay an amount equivalent to 350,000 liters and shall make sales slips in the name of the gas station.

The card merchant borrowed the name of the card merchant and aided and abetting the above unregistered petroleum retail business.

C. Defendant C’s oil operated by Defendant C from January 7, 2009 to April 30, 2009

The mobile card terminal of a lawsuit is lent to A, and the crime inundation is committed from the farm in the case of Pakistan, etc.

Using physical cards exclusive of the purchase of non-taxable transit by farmers, such as No. 43 through 130 per annum;

to pay an amount equivalent to 1,094,585 liters of duty-free transit and to issue sales slips in the name of the above station.

to lend the name of the credit card merchant and to facilitate such unregistered petroleum retail business;

1.2

2. The lower court, citing the reasoning of the first instance judgment, based on the facts and circumstances stated in its reasoning, based on the following:

For the same reason, the facts charged in the instant case deemed that there was no proof of crime, and as to the Defendants

The judgment of the first instance that acquitted was affirmed as it is.

A. The duty-free competition where the defendant A supplied farmers with light oil equivalent to 1,078,409 liters

The act of selling duty-free transit between Defendant B, C’s gas station, and farmers qualified to handle the case;

agent or intermediary is merely a broker or intermediary.

B. Of the interrogation protocol of the defendant A against the prosecution (as of August 22, 2012, the interrogation protocol for the defendant No. 248)

The non-speak and the 249 Defendant A’s coal application (as of August 24, 2012), among the non-speak parts, are several parts.

Due to long-term investigations conducted over the year, farmers are bankrupt, and they are also detained, etc.

A suspect examination protocol prepared by the prosecution is prepared under the state of pressure on the prosecution, and whether such state is in such situation.

As a written application for a confession of part of the confession was prepared, the admissibility of evidence has no voluntariness.

Defendant A solely with the remaining evidence shall not be deemed to have been 462,175 litresponding

No fact of selling through tax exemption can be recognized.

C. Mobile card terminals used by Defendant A for the convenience of settlement

Defendants B and C shall not only go through the tax exemption on their own account and on their own account.

The above gas station shall be its own, even if taxes have been sold and supplied in a normal manner.

Thus, Defendant B and C cannot be deemed to have lent the name of the credit card merchant to Defendant A.

(c)

3. However, it is difficult to accept the above determination by the lower court for the following reasons.

(a) A portion of sales to farmers, which is equivalent to 1,078,409 liters and credit card merchants;

Part of title lending

1) Generally, the party to the contract is the party’s intent of interpretation involved in the contract.

c. Cases where an actor to enter into a contract has done legal acts under the name of another person;

One of the actors or holders of a title deed may be the party to the contract, and the first offender and the second offender.

If the other party's intent is consistent, the contract shall be executed by the offender or holder as agreed upon.

parties shall be determined as parties, and if the intent of the actor and the other party are not in accord, it shall be

Detailed circumstances before and after the conclusion of the contract, such as the nature, contents, purpose, and details of the contract;

on the basis of this section, if the other party is a reasonable person, either the actor or the nominal owner as a contracting party.

As to whether it would prejudice a party (Supreme Court Decision 2003Da2038, Dec. 12, 2003).

Supreme Court Decision 44059; Supreme Court Decision 2007Da31990 Decided September 6, 2007, etc.). Meanwhile, petroleum and petroleum are on the other hand.

Article 10(4) of the Alternative Fuel Business Act (hereinafter referred to as the "petroleum Business Act"), Article 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act

Determination of who is a petroleum seller in light of subparagraph 3, Article 15(1) [Attachment 2], etc.

for sale of such petroleum substantially, the storage facilities and oil supply facilities used in selling such petroleum

Whether they are controlled and managed shall also be considered together; and the former specialized credit financial business

The Act (amended by Act No. 10062, Mar. 12, 2010; hereinafter referred to as the "Specialized Credit Finance Business Act").

section 19(4)(4)(4) of the credit card merchant shall be lent to another person.

the credit card merchant name in light of the purpose and overall purport of the Specialized Credit Finance Business Act

The motive and circumstances of the transaction, the repetition of the name lending, the degree and duration of the continuous transaction, etc.

may be deemed a substantial subject of credit card merchants by a person who is not the name of the credit card merchant.

to this extent.

2) According to the reasoning of the lower judgment and the record, the following facts are revealed.

(1) From July 2008, farmers have obtained confirmation from the Nonghyup, and thereafter are registered through tax exemption.

The payment shall be made at the free price using the cream card exclusively for the purchase of duty-free transit at the gas station.

J. The gas station supplier shall purchase transit from the oil station as its dutiable value and supply it to farmers, and

Then, the gas station is exempted from the manner that the tax equivalent to the difference in the above price is to be refunded at the tax office.

It was possible to purchase taxes in transit.

(2) Defendant A is disqualified to sell tax-free transit directly to farmers without being entitled to do so.

Defendant B and C designated as a dealer of duty-free transit for sale, 1 liter of duty-free transit

Defendant B and C on the condition that the degree of 20 won per name is paid in return for the name lending.

It borrowed a mobile card terminal in the name of the gas station that was under the Decree.

③ Defendant A directly visits the farmer with the mobile card terminal as above.

have farmers settle the proceeds of tax-free transit using the check exclusively for the purchase of tax-free transit;

Then, the number of the vehicle for transportation in transit and the name of the driver shall be the defendant B and C.

The notice was made.

(D) Defendant B and C ordered the transit of the tax exemption that was settled by the card as above in the same manner as the above.

The number of the transport vehicle delivered by the high-person A and the name of the driver was notified, and similar.

or if the delivery date is determined from the oil reservoir, the Defendant A through an overseas driver.

In addition, it promptly delivered tax exemption to farmers in the oil reservoir.

5. Defendant A’s demand by farmers for selling tax-free transit to farmers.

the credit card payments to farmers, or to pay the cash he or she had to do so;

Farmers and non-farmers by means of supplying tax-free transit prior to the settlement of the card;

Commercial transactions have been maintained.

3) Examining the above facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the farmers are exempt from tax.

Defendant A is a party who sells the goods without registration, and Defendant A is a party who sells the goods without registration.

Defendant B and C with knowledge of these circumstances, and Defendant B and C

The Specialized Credit Financial Business Act shall lend a mobile card terminal in the name of the gas station operated by it.

the name of the credit card merchant and facilitate Defendant A’s non-registered petroleum retail business;

It is said that aiding and abetting this.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the Defendants

All the facts charged were found not guilty on the ground that there was no proof of crime.

of the parties to a contract exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules; or

In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on confirmation, etc., thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

The reason for appeal is with merit.

(b) A portion of sales to a false name-oriented distributor, which is equivalent to 462,175 liters of duty exemption;

1) The defendant's statement in the suspect examination protocol prepared by the prosecutor and thereafter the prosecutor's office

The court shall, in the event that it contests the voluntariness of the statements submitted to it and that it is a false confession

The educational background, career, occupation, social status, intelligence, examination of suspects of a defendant according to specific cases;

The contents of statements entered in the protocol and the form of such protocol, the time when a written statement is prepared and before and after it;

In light of all the circumstances, such as the circumstances and the contents of the statement, the above statement is made with free conviction;

It is necessary to determine whether a case is intended to be decided upon (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Do705, May 30, 2003; Supreme Court Decision 2003Do705, Supreme Court Decision 88

Court Decision 2009Do1603 decided January 10, 201, 27, etc.

2) In light of such legal principles, the circumstances leading up to Defendant A’s confession, the details and the statement

All the circumstances shown in the records of this case, such as the age, educational background, career, and intelligence of the other defendant A.

In full view, even if some farmers reverse their previous confessions, the prosecutor before such reversals.

The confessions made by Defendant A based on the confessions made shall be deemed to have been forced to commit a crime against Defendant A.

The deception of a private institution shall not be deemed to constitute deception of such institution, and further, the defendant A shall be subject to deception of the investigative institution.

Other circumstances to see that a confession was made do not peep. Moreover, the lower court’s decision was made.

(s) The circumstance alone is that the protocol of examination of the suspect against Defendant A by the prosecution ( August 2012) against the defendant 248

22. The non-speak and the non-speak part among the 249 defendant A's coal applications (as of August 24, 2012)

The confessions made in the state of no voluntariness due to intimidation, etc. of the investigative agency.

It cannot be deemed that it is an act.

Nevertheless, the court below held that Defendant A’s guilty evidence of this part of the facts charged is guilty.

The court below rejected the above confessions only for the reasons stated in its reasoning, and found this part of the facts charged

Inasmuch as there is no other evidence, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict, which is logical and empirical reason.

It exceeds the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of the law, or errors in the legal principles regarding the Voluntary

The lower court erred that affected the conclusion of the judgment (the Defendant A’s confession was credibility and this part of the confession was credibility).

Whether the confessions can be used as evidence proving the facts charged, or if the confessions are not reliable, the court

Even if there is no modification of indictment, it shall be distributed ex officio to Defendant A in an unregistered manner.

Punishment for a crime of violating the Petroleum Business Act by citing a criminal fact of selling tax-free transit to a business operator.

The ground of appeal pointed out this issue is with merit.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed, and the case shall be tried and judged again by the court below.

It is remanded to the Supreme Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Byung-hee

Chief Justice Park Jong-young

Justices Kim Jae-han