If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Although the Defendant was a person running a restaurant of “C” on the second floor of the building B in Seosan City, and anyone was prohibited from selling, lending, or distributing drugs harmful to juveniles, etc. to juveniles, around October 3, 2013, the Defendant did not verify the status and age of 8 juvenile D (nivers, age 17) and sold alcoholic beverages, which are juvenile drugs equivalent to 28,000 won at the market price, such as alcoholic beverages and small liquor 6 illness, and disease of 28,000 won.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each self-statement of D, E, F, G, H, and I;

1. Each police statement made to D, H, G, F, E, and I;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on site of violation;

1. Article 59 of the Juvenile Protection Act and Articles 59 subparagraph 6 and 28 (1) of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the selection of fines;

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

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant demanded and confirmed the presentation of identification cards to the instant criminal facts before crackdown, and confirmed whether he/she was an adult by allowing a person who did not enter his/her identification card to enter his/her resident registration number in the body room. As such, the Defendant asserts that he/she sold alcohol with his/her knowledge that he/she was adult.

In light of the purpose of legislation of the Juvenile Protection Act to regulate the distribution of drugs harmful to juveniles, drugs harmful to juveniles, and access to harmful business establishments, when there are circumstances to suspect juveniles by appearance or rent, it shall confirm whether juveniles are juveniles by identification card or other reliable methods and sell drugs harmful to juveniles, such as alcoholic beverages.

According to the images of the illegal field photographs taken immediately after the control of this case, it is deemed that there was a sufficient reason to suspect that the relevant juveniles were minors in light of the appearance or screen of juveniles who sold alcohol by the defendant.