beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 200,000 won.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of each of the facts charged of this case by misunderstanding the facts or misapprehending the legal principles, even though the travel agency only arranged a car rental contract and did not have concluded each of the instant rental contracts on behalf of the rental company.
2. Determination:
A. Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment with respect to the defendant's criminal facts and applicable provisions of Acts as follows, in the trial of the court, and the subject of the judgment was changed by this court's permission. Thus, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.
1) Criminal facts constituting the primary criminal facts are those who are engaged in travel agency business while running L travel agency.
(1) On April 201, 201, the Defendant entered into a contract to lend the said company’s automobile rental business to N for 24 hours at the office of the above travel agency on M 2nd floor of the second floor of the Jeju Island, under the qualification of the agent of the Auene Corporation, and entered into a contract to lend the said company’s automobile rental business to N for 24 hours, and the said company entered into a contract to KRW 42,400,000, not for the terms and conditions reported by the said company. The said company leased the said vehicle to N in accordance with the terms and conditions of the said contract and did not implement the reported rental terms and conditions.
(B) On April 201, the Defendant entered into a contract to lend Qic car to P for 24 hours with respect to the said company’s automobile rental business as an agent at the above travel agency office, and entered into a contract to lend Qic car to P for 24 hours, not KRW 59,000,000, which was reported by the said company. The said company did not comply with the terms and conditions of the above contract by lending the said car to P in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract.
(C) The Defendant on 2011.