logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.09.29 2016고단3455
사기방조등
Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year, for six months, and for one year, for Defendant C, respectively.

except that this shall not apply.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is a person who sells petroleum under the trade name, “F gas station,” “H gas station,” “H gas station,” “B from May 9, 2012 to March 31, 2015,” and “J gas station,” “B” from April 1, 2015,” “Y gas station,” “B,” “B,” “B,” “B,” “,” “,” “B,” “,” “,” “,” “,” “,” “,” “,” “,” “,” “,” “,” “,” “,” “,” “,” “,” “,” “, etc.

D) The Defendant B and C intended to obtain the subsidies from the competent local government by selling a light oil to the borrower of the cargo vehicle as the fuel of the vehicle, and by settling the payment using the freight driver’s welfare card as if he sold the light on the D’s road. Defendant B and C supplied the above D with a light oil to sell it as the fuel for the vehicle, and Defendant A decided to sell the light oil to the borrower of the cargo in accordance with the above D’s instruction.

1. Defendant A

A. On June 30, 2013, the Defendant violated the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act, in collusion with D and without registering it with the competent authority, sold 261.07 square meters of oil, such as the passenger freight vehicle, which L is operated using the K tank of D owned K, as fuel for the vehicle, and D paid 426,60 won of the price therefor from around that time until July 27, 2015, by paying a total of KRW 2,066, such as a sum of KRW 429,365,14, as indicated in the list of crimes committed in the attached Table, and sold the proceeds of sale as fuel for the vehicle and by paying the sales amount of KRW 653,359,210,210, as fuel for the vehicle.

B. The Defendant was aware of the fact that, with respect to the oil sold as set forth in the above A, the borrower was in charge of the local government as if the truck and the truck were to pay for the oil sold, and that he was in charge of receiving the subsidy.

Nevertheless, on June 30, 2013, the Defendant was unable to use it for the motor vehicle fuel against the borrower in the actual truck of MM on June 30, 2013.

arrow