All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the analysis of the quantity of the G gas station, which the Defendant had operated by the misunderstanding of facts, the Defendant sold more quantity than the transit quantity held during the period specified in the facts charged, and the amount to be left in the balance, as well as the amount to be left in the balance, the Defendant can be recognized to have supplied pseudo petroleum to J during the above period, and the crime of fraud is established as to the amount equivalent to the fuel price. 2) The sentence of the lower court’s unreasonable sentencing (two months of imprisonment) is too uneasible and unfair.

B. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles did not sell pseudo petroleum except for the crime committed on April 13, 2012, and the lower court, without considering the overall purport of the Defendant’s statement even though the Defendant denied the facts charged in the instant case without any confession, without considering the overall purport of the Defendant’s statement, arbitrarily taken specific parts as evidence, and did not follow the methods and procedures prescribed in the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act and the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, and did not guarantee the Defendant’s procedural right to participate in the collection of samples and quality inspection results ( March 29, 2012);

4.8.8.

4. 9.9.1) Since it was adopted as evidence and used as evidence of conviction, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The sentence of the court below on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts, evidence that there is a criminal fact in the first criminal procedure shall be presented by the prosecutor, and even if the defendant’s appeal is unreasonable and is the same as the defendant’s appeal is false, it cannot be disadvantageous to the defendant, and the proof of the criminal fact can be acknowledged by the judge to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.