The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of mistake 1) Business as stated in the judgment of the court below by the defendant (hereinafter "the business of this case").

(2) The Defendant did not recognize the illegality of the instant business since he did not recognize the illegality of the instant business since he stated that “the instant business was provided by the competent authorities to the effect that the instant business was not subject to a report on accommodation business” at the time of acquiring the instant business by transfer from the transferor, because the instant business was conducted for the purpose of “SOHO service” and constitutes a short-term lease business, not a substantive accommodation business, regardless of the type of business in the business registration.

3) For the foregoing reasons, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the charge of this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts. B. The court below’s sentence of unfair sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1 The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts: (i) the business of this case is registered as a business operator at the competent tax office or as other accommodation business; (ii) the business site of this case is attached with a daily fixed rate, night fixed rate, and at least 10 out of 27 occasions at the time of being discovered as a non-reported act; and (iii) the first person who was employed as an employee in the business site of this case remains in the workplace from 10:0 to 11:00 a.m. from the next day; and (iv) the Defendant stated that the daily rate is more than 20% of the customers of the business of this case; and (v) the advertisement site prepared in the business of this case is short-term or time period.