The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Anyone who intends to operate 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.

Judgment

As evidence to acknowledge the facts charged of this case, there are the suspect interrogation protocol and each tax invoice for the defendant prepared by the judicial police assistant.

The Defendant consistently stated in this court that he did not operate an aggregate extraction business on the date of the facts charged, and the interrogation protocol on the Defendant prepared by the judicial police assistant stated that he did not engage in the business of screening aggregate, and stated to the effect that he denied the facts charged. Each of the above tax invoices was loaded on aggregate which completed screening prior to the date of the facts charged in this case, and was only sold thereafter. The witness D stated that the Defendant did not have any confirmation on the fact that he operated the aggregate extraction business on the date of the facts charged, and it is insufficient to view that the Defendant operated the aggregate extraction business on the date of the facts charged.

Therefore, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to prove that the defendant has been engaged in aggregate extraction business on the date of the charge, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Thus, the facts charged of this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, is not guilty under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition by publicly announcing the summary of the judgment of the defendant under Article 58 (