A. When it was difficult for the prosecutor to prove that the Defendant used the commercial motor vehicle for transport with compensation due to the fact that the Defendant leased the commercial motor vehicle and used it for transport, the charges were changed to the fact that the leased commercial motor vehicle was replaced by another person, and the lower court’s finding of the facts based on such changed charges is unreasonable.

B. The punishment of the lower court is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the prosecutor may add, withdraw, or change the facts charged or the applicable legal provisions stated in the indictment with the permission of the court within the scope not impairing the identity of the facts charged. The identity of the facts charged is maintained as it is if the social factual relations, which form the basis of the facts charged, are the same in basic respect. In determining the identity of such basic facts, the defendant’s act and social factual relations shall be based in mind with the function of identity of the facts, and normative elements shall also be taken into consideration (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do9593, Jun. 24, 2010). According to the foregoing legal principles, the prosecutor first received the transportation charge from the defendant on Oct. 31, 2013, the defendant leased the Csch Rexn car from the Defendant Co., Ltd., Ltd., and received the transportation charge from the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan City guest Park Dong-dong at around March 1404, 2015.

Accordingly, the Defendant leased a commercial automobile of a car rental business operator and used it for transportation with compensation.

“On the eight-yearly trial date of the lower court, the Defendant was prosecuted as the facts charged, and thereafter, “On October 31, 2013, the Defendant leased the Cex car from the Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd., Ltd., and lent it to the person in unsound name after renting it.