The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence shall be suspended for the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case without receiving fees from passengers was erroneous and erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The lower court’s sentencing of an unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 300,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, Article 90 subparag. 1 of the Passenger Transport Service Act punishs a person who conducts an act of passenger transport business using a motor vehicle other than the motor vehicle stipulated in Article 2 without obtaining a license under Article 4(1) of the same Act. Here, “passenger transport business” refers to a business (Article 2 subparag. 3 of the same Act) of transporting passengers with compensation using a motor vehicle in response to the demand from another person. In light of the legislative intent and contents of the above provision, even if the transport fee was not actually paid, it shall be subject to punishment in cases where the passenger was transported in return for the payment of the transport fee, and furthermore, it shall include cases where the transport of passengers is objectively deemed to have commenced according to the agreement with the passengers, not only after the completion of passenger transport, but also after the arrival of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below. In light of the following circumstances, even if the defendant failed to receive the transport fee and the distance of passengers on board is 2 meters or more, it shall be subject to punishment for passenger call from the applicable provisions of this case.

① The Defendant, around 13:00 on March 15, 2013, received from “H call Ban,” “I have customers in the sexual ode.”