Acquittal of the accused shall be acquitted.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the owner or user of a private-use truck (bridges) who is the operator of B B B, is not allowed to provide or lease a private-use truck for the purpose of transporting the cargo for transport purposes. On July 5, 2013, the Defendant, using the above vehicle on the 1st floor to 7th floor, provided a private-use truck for the purpose of transporting the cargo for transport purposes at a cost by receiving KRW 1620,000 for the expenses of directors, while transporting the cargo for transport purposes from the 15:30 on July 5, 2013.

2. According to the records, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 3,00,000 on December 12, 2013, to the crime of violating the Passenger Transport Service Act, which stated that “The owner or user of a F Private Truck (2.5 tons truck) shall not provide or lease a private-use truck for the purpose of transporting the cargo for the purpose of transporting the cargo for a fee, but on July 5, 2013, the Defendant shall not provide or rent the private-use truck for the purpose of transporting the cargo for the purpose of transporting the cargo of KRW 113,710,00 for eight days after storing the moving-in in the Da apartment in Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government for eight days, and shall transport the cargo for the above apartment as KRW 113,710,00 for the purpose of transporting the cargo for the purpose of transporting the cargo for a fee of KRW 1620,00 for the purpose of transporting the cargo for a fee.” The summary order is finalized on February 18, 2014.

In the case of a commercial concurrence relationship under Article 40 of the Criminal Act, the res judicata effect of a final and conclusive judgment on one of them shall also extend to other crimes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 91Do643, Jun. 25, 1991; 91Do2642, Dec. 10, 191). Here, one of the acts refers to a situation in which, regardless of the legal assessment, an act in light of social concept is evaluated as one as a condition in the nature of an object.

(See Supreme Court Decision 86Do2731 delivered on February 24, 1987). However, according to the above facts, the crime of violation of the Passenger Transport Service Act against which a summary order has been issued and the case committed prior to the issuance of the above summary order.