The defendant shall be innocent.

1. A person who intends to engage in ferry business as to the summary of the facts charged shall obtain a license from the chief of the competent maritime police station or report it to the chief of the competent maritime police station, as prescribed by Presidential Decree;

At around 7:30 on December 20, 2018, the Defendant, at the port of Gunsan Si, without obtaining a license for a ferry business from the head of the Gun/Gu maritime police station having jurisdiction over the port of Gun, and the Defendant, at around 10:00 on December 20, 201, left the port where six workers belonging to the above (oil)B were on board the fishing boat C (9.77 tons) of the Gunsan City, the captain, and carried on a non-licensed ferry business by transporting up to 0.05 nautical miles (D) from the Gun Do Do 0.05 nautical miles (N 36:06 degrees 06 degrees 06 degrees 54 degrees North latitude and 126.59 degrees 42 seconds East).

2. Article 2 Subparag. 2 of the Excursion Ship and Ferry Business Act provides that “ferry business” is a business with ferry and ferry wharfs to transport passengers or passengers and things on inland waters or on the sea as determined by the Presidential Decree and is not subject to the application of the Marine Transportation Act.

However, according to the evidence submitted, it is acknowledged that the defendant requested from the side of December 13, 2018 (oil)B to transport "E" service workers who placed an order to (oil)B at the Sea Headquarters of the Korea Water Resources Corporation to the workplace after a week, and received a special inspection on December 18, 2018 under the name of the chief director of the Korea Sea Traffic Safety Authority on December 20, 2018. The defendant transferred the term of validity to the workplace on December 20, 2018 according to the above special inspection certificate, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant used the "ferry Business" by engaging in transportation prohibited by the excursion ship and ferry business.

Therefore, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime.