The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The article of an erroneous misunderstanding of facts was arbitrarily removed from the Defendant’s private cargo vehicle, and the Defendant did not have any intention to transport the said vehicle.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) In light of the spirit of the substantial direct and psychological principle adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act, unless there are special circumstances to deem that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous, or in view of the results of the first instance court’s examination and the results of additional examination of evidence not later than the closing of argument in the appellate trial, maintaining the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance court is clearly unfair, the appellate court should respect the determination on the credibility of the statement made

(2) On November 24, 2006, the lower court directly examined H and G, etc., and found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case by recognizing the credibility of the testimony. There are special circumstances to deem that the lower court’s determination of credibility of the testimony was clearly erroneous.

It is not considered significantly unfair to maintain its judgment as it is.

Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, including the above testimony, the defendant operated two cargo vehicles for business use (1t) and one private cargo vehicle (1t) as the chief executive officer, and moved up on the side of the private cargo vehicle immediately adjacent to the private bridge. He did not control the moving-out of the private cargo vehicle, and the fact that the defendant transported one additional cargo vehicle for business use after reporting it to use the private cargo vehicle for business use due to the dispute over the cost of H and the private bridge car.