logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.11.08 2018노1298
석유및석유대체연료사업법위반
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding of the legal principles and misunderstanding of the defendants only transported only in a condition that they may be a fake petroleum product, and on a different premise, the judgment of the court below which found the defendants guilty is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles.

B. The sentence that the lower court sentenced the Defendants (Defendant A: a fine of KRW 9 million, Defendant B: a fine of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the record as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendants’ assertion that only transported a fake petroleum product only without knowledge is unacceptable.

1) The “A factory,” which is a business place for the instant crime, is not a crude oil importer or a distributor, but a waste collection company, and the “K repository” also is difficult to be deemed to be a normal storage place in light of its external appearance or surrounding environment, etc. (at the time of the police investigation, Defendant A also stated that “(K repository) at the time of the police investigation that there was a large difference in the location or size from the normal storage place or agency,” and Defendant B also stated that “the police investigation, at the time of the police investigation, was considered to be a place where the oil was made because the pent was built in the factory near the Y, not the main oil station, and it was considered to be a place where the oil was made.” (2) Defendant A had been engaged in the business of transporting oil in the tank with a tank for about 10 years, and there was a history of being investigated or discovered as a suspicion of selling petroleum products.

On the other hand, Defendant A appears to have suffered from approximately one hour when he/she transferred fake petroleum products to his/her tank glass in “A factory” or “K repository”. However, it is difficult for Defendant A to easily understand that he/she transferred and transported them even though he/she performed the same work within 10 hours each time, in light of Defendant A’s career, history, etc.

(iii)..

arrow