The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for six months and two years of suspended execution) that the court below sentenced against the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal for ex officio determination.

The penal provisions of Articles 46 subparag. 10 and 39(1)7 of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act (hereinafter “the penal provisions of this case”) are clear in accordance with the provisions of Article 46 subparag. 10 and Article 39(1)7 (hereinafter “petroleum Business Act”) that “business operators, petroleum export-import business operators, petroleum retail business operators, petroleum stockpiling agents, or alternative fuel manufacturers, etc. (hereinafter “petroleum retailers, etc.”)”. Meanwhile, Article 48 of the same Act directly applies the penal provisions of this case to the Defendant who committed an act of violating Articles 44 through 47 in relation to the business of the corporation or individual, not only shall the offender be punished, but also the corporation or individual shall be punished by a fine under the relevant provisions, and the purport of this provision is to punish both the offender who committed a violation of each of this Article and the “corporation or individual, such as petroleum retailers, etc.,” and the Defendant is also subject to the penal provisions of Article 45 of the Petroleum Business Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 97Do4858, etc.).