No one shall sell alcoholic beverages to juveniles.

On February 22, 2012, the Defendant received 6,000 won a week from 3 juvenile E (the age of 17) and provided 6,000 won a week in the above restaurant.

Accordingly, the defendant sold alcoholic beverages to juveniles.

2. According to each legal statement of the witness F, G, H, and I, the witness E’s legal statement and each written statement of J, K, E, L, and H, the fact that the Defendant’s “D” restaurant operated by the Defendant on the date and time stated in the facts charged was sold to juveniles, E, etc. is recognized.

However, according to the witness F, G, and I’s respective legal statements, it is acknowledged that the defendant was not in the above restaurant, and the defendant was an employee I, and the defendant was the above restaurant only when he was in the time when he controlled F and G, a police officer. In light of this, the witness E’s statement to the effect that “the defendant was in the above restaurant with the employee I and sold alcoholic beverages to the above youth through I” was not reliable, and it is difficult to believe that the witness E’s statement to the effect that “the defendant was in the above restaurant with the employee I and sold alcoholic beverages to the above youth through I” was not reliable, and otherwise, the defendant committed a violation such as direct facts charged.

or there is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant's employees knowingly sell alcoholic beverages to juveniles.

3. In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime and thus, the defendant is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act