The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the charges of this case by misunderstanding the fact that the Defendant had an aggregate extraction business by selecting aggregate for profit without being registered with the Mayor of Namyang-ju on the date and time indicated in the facts charged

2. Determination

(a) A person who intends to operate an aggregate extraction business shall register with the head of a Si/Gun/Gu;

Nevertheless, from December 16, 201 to November 201, the Defendant operated an aggregate extraction business that selects aggregate for profit without being registered with the Southern-si City Mayor from Namyang-si to Namyang-si, and without being registered with the Southern-si Mayor.

B. The lower court stated that the Defendant consistently stated that he did not operate an aggregate extraction business on the date of the facts charged in the lower court’s trial, and that the interrogation protocol of the Defendant prepared by the judicial police assistant did not engage in the business of screening aggregate, and stated to the effect that he denied the facts charged, and that the tax invoice was loaded and sold only after the time prior to the date of the facts charged, and that D’s witness stated that there was no confirmation as to the fact that the Defendant had operated an aggregate extraction business on the date of the facts charged, and thus, it is insufficient to deem that the Defendant had operated an aggregate extraction business on the sole basis of the above evidence alone. Accordingly, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was insufficient to prove that the Defendant had operated the aggregate extraction business on the date of the facts charged, and that there was no evidence

C. The burden of proof of the facts charged in the criminal trial for the trial of the trial court is to the public prosecutor, and the conviction is to the extent that there is no room for a judge to make a reasonable doubt.