1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The petroleum and alternative fuel business that the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff on March 2, 2017.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is running a petroleum sales business with the trade name called “C gas station” (hereinafter “instant gas station”) in Sejong Special Self-Governing City B.

B. From May 8, 2016 to July 25, 2016, the Plaintiff sold 2,042,164 won in total on nine occasions to D. D used dump trucks (F) for its own business purpose.

C. On July 27, 2016, the Daejeon Chungcheong Headquarters received from D a written statement from D that it used D’s fuel for a vehicle, and that it purchased light oil at D’s gas station, and received from D a written statement from D that it visited the gas station of this case to sell light oil to D.

On August 8, 2016, Daejeon Chungcheong Headquarters notified the Defendant that “The Korea Petroleum & Distribution Authority violated Article 39(1)8 of the former Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act (amended by Act No. 14774, Apr. 18, 2017; hereinafter “former Petroleum Business Act”) by selling light oil in the instant gas station as vehicle fuel as a result of the quality inspection of petroleum products and the distribution inspection conducted on July 27, 2016.”

E. On March 2, 2017, after prior notice of disposition and hearing of opinions, the Defendant sold light oil to the Plaintiff as fuel for vehicle machinery in violation of Article 39(1)8 of the former Petroleum Business Act.

(hereinafter “instant violation”) imposed a penalty surcharge of KRW 50 million on the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 7, and 8 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the witness D and E testimony of the first instance court, the fact-finding results on the Daejeon Sejong C&C headquarters of the first instance court, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff sold the same oil to D, but D has a variety of oil.