A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the prosecutor applied for changes in the contents of Article 58 subparag. 3 of the Juvenile Protection Act to “Article 59 subparag. 6 of the Juvenile Protection Act” in the provisions of the Act applicable to the indictment in this case at the trial of the party. Since the above court permitted changes in the subject of the judgment, the judgment of the court of first instance was no longer maintained in this respect.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and we will examine below.

3. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined in the first instance court’s judgment on the grounds of appeal, the Defendant is a wife and a person operating C along with E, the nominal owner of business registration, and the fact of selling alcoholic beverages to D, a juvenile, at the time and place indicated in the facts charged is sufficiently recognized. Thus, the Defendant’s assertion

4. Thus, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit, but the judgment of the court of first instance is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts and evidence against the defendant recognized by the court is identical to the facts and the summary of the evidence in the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 59 subparagraph 6 of the Act on the Punishment of Crimes and Article 28 (1) of the Act on the Protection of Juveniles Eligible for the Selection of Punishment;

2. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse.