The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The Defendant in the facts charged in the instant case: (a) was a person operating ice sales business in the name of “D”; and (b) was unable to use and make profits from public property without obtaining permission from the head of a local government, and (c) was used and made profits from public property without obtaining permission from the head of a local government, by running a business of selling ice 30 g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g

2. The facts charged in the instant case are crimes falling under Articles 99 and 6(1) of the Public Property and Commodity Management Act (hereinafter “the Act”). As such, the parking lot of the former Agricultural and Fishery Products Wholesale Market used and used by the Defendant constitutes “administrative property” as prescribed by the same Act.

According to Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Act, "public property" means property under each subparagraph of Article 4 (1) of the Act, which is owned by a local government in accordance with a local government's burden, contribution acceptance, or pursuant to a statute, and Article 5 (1) of the Act divides public property into administrative property and general property. Thus, administrative property should be owned by a local government as it

However, according to the certified transcript of corporate register and the copy of the register of land submitted by the defendant, the owner of the Gu agricultural and fishery products wholesale market is the Gu agricultural and fishery products wholesale market management corporation (title after modification: the Gu agricultural and fishery products wholesale market management corporation) and the above corporation is a local public corporation with independent corporate personality established pursuant to Article 21 of the Act on Distribution and Price Stabilization of Agricultural and Fishery Products and Articles 50 and

Therefore, the parking lot for the old agricultural and fishery products wholesale market cannot be considered as administrative property owned by local governments.

3. In conclusion, the facts charged of this case are without proof of crime.