The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the course of controlling the illegality of the collection procedure, the inspectors collected samples without being present or present at the outside of the jurisdiction, in violation of the rules on the quality inspection of petroleum products, and did not obtain the confirmation of collection of samples and seals, and did not submit the result of simplified inspection.

Therefore, there is an error in the procedure of collecting samples.

B. misunderstanding of facts1) The Defendant is Maclass as indicated in paragraph (1) of criminal facts as indicated in the judgment on April 16, 2018 (H; hereinafter “the instant Maclass”).

(2) The Defendant, while selling light oil in transit, did not have a limited liability. The Defendant did not know the accurate cause of detection of light oil, but appears to have injected oil by any person other than the Defendant. As such, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have sold light oil in this case. (2) The Defendant, as indicated in paragraph (2) of the criminal facts of April 17, 2018, sold light oil to caters (H “H” of the P indictment is a clerical error in the “P”; hereinafter “the instant caters”). However, there was some mixing of light oil in the process of selling light oil to caters listed in paragraph (2) of the criminal facts of this case. However, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant intentionally sold oil in the instant construction site without properly cleaning the oil remaining in the caters after supplying it to other companies on the preceding day.

C. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (three million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the procedure for collecting samples and on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The following facts are acknowledged according to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below.

1) The Defendant is located in Namdong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City C (hereinafter “instant gas station”).

A) A person who reports and substantially operates Q Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ Q”) in the name of Company D is the subcontractor.