The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the legal principles, the duty of care for the crime of acquiring goods by occupational negligence is borne by the person engaged in the business of handling used goods such as solid goods or pawnba, so the defendant, who runs the steel wholesale business, has no duty of care to confirm that the steel is stolen.

It is against the principle of no punishment without law to interpret that all persons who do not handle used goods such as the court below bear the duty of care to confirm whether they are stolen or not.

In addition, while the court below judged that the defendant violated his duty of care, it did not explain the specific contents of the defendant's duty of care.

Ultimately, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to occupational duty of care.

B. In determining the facts, the Defendant believed the horses of D, which are the scrap metal of the insolvent company, confirmed the source of the iron plate to D, and purchased the instant iron plates at a lower price than the closed scrap metal at a lower price than the market price in a state where it was not known as the stolen goods.

Although the Defendant did not prepare the Director of the Customer or issue a tax invoice, it cannot be readily concluded that the Defendant was aware of the fact that he was the stolen property.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous in misconception of facts.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principle, the business category in the crime of acquiring goods by occupational negligence refers to the business continuously engaged in as a single position in the social life of a person, and the business incidental thereto is also included in addition to the principal business. Therefore, the goods sale and distribution business also constitutes the business of selling goods by occupational negligence and the business of selling goods.

Therefore, even if the defendant is not a person engaged in the handling of used goods such as pawning or solid goods, he is engaged in the steel sale business, etc., and the steel plate of this case is operated.