The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant put the vehicle subject to repair into the upper-tier maintenance business and receives the money in return is a practice in the industry, and there is no possibility of expectation about the elements of a crime, illegality, and lawful act.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant, while operating the “C”, which is a motor vehicle parts maintenance business establishment, entered the vehicles that cannot be repaired solely from December 22, 2008 to June 26, 2012 into the “F,” which is the upper-tier maintenance business establishment, over 763 times, and received a total of 61,841,000 won in return.

B. Determination by the Defendant, regardless of the will of the customers entrusted with repairs, the receipt of fees from the Company only by the Company F, which is a specific business entity, is detrimental to the fair competition order among the rearrangement business establishments. It is deemed that the Automobile Management Act prohibits an automobile management business entity from receiving illegal money and valuables.

In addition, the Defendant appears to have sufficiently consulted with the customer whether to permit the Defendant to leave the vehicle to a specific maintenance facility on behalf of the customer, and the amount of the fee. Thus, it cannot be said that the Defendant did not commit any criminal act as indicated in the judgment of the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. According to the conclusion, the defendant's appeal of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.