The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Determination of facts and misapprehension of legal principles on the grounds of appeal (the money received by the defendant from his customers at the time of transfer of the article in this case is not the cost of commercial transport, but the cost of personnel necessary for the transfer of the article in this case. Thus, the defendant cannot be deemed to have provided a private-use truck for the transport of cargo at a cost, and it is unreasonable to apply the Trucking Transport Business Act to the business activities of the defendant operating a packing director company)

A. Although there are estimates and contracts (Evidence No. 10) as evidence supporting the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, it is reasonable to view that the defendant provided the truck of this case for transportation with compensation, considering the following as a whole: (a) the defendant operated this article for the business at the time of this case; (b) the defendant operated this article for the business at the time of this case; (c) the usual packing director services occupy the main part of the transportation (transport and loading and unloading) together with the packing, storage, placement, cleaning services; and (d) the defendant's payment received from the customer includes the user fees of all vehicles used for transportation of this article, other than personnel expenses, packing materials, and other consumption expenses; and (e) the defendant's above assertion disputing this issue

Meanwhile, the defendant cannot be deemed excluded from the application of the Trucking Transport Business Act that prohibits the provision of a private-use truck for the purpose of transporting cargo solely on the ground that the defendant operates a package director service company, so the defendant's above assertion of this issue cannot be accepted.

B. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing, the first instance court sentenced the Defendant by comprehensively taking account of the fact that the Defendant had been punished for a crime similar to the instant case several times, and other factors of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments.