음악산업진흥에관한법률위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant, around 3:00 on January 29, 2012, in violation of the code of practice of singing practice room business operators, he/she should not sell or provide alcoholic beverages at 11, Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-gu, Seoul, which he/she operated, provided one can can cans, which are alcoholic beverages to customers D.
2. Determination
A. Direct evidence corresponding to the facts charged in the instant case lies in the witness D’s statement in the third trial record and the police’s statement about D’s statement.
However, in light of the remaining evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the above evidence has no credibility in its statement in the following point.
① At the time of the instant case, D was under the influence of alcohol without preparing a written statement from the police to the point of time.
② Since the Defendant did not know that D was reported to the police, it appears that the police officer could not wear the air conditioners adjacent to the Kabter at the time of dispatch. Police officers dispatched at the time of dispatch did not find cans in the air conditioners adjacent to the Kabter.
③ Police Officers E, who called to sing on the day of the instant case, stated that they received orders for beer at 11 times in order to beer and reported to 112 as they did not place an order for beer, but they failed to do so. When a witness investigation is conducted by the police, D stated that he did not place a separate order for beer, and that he went out of the air conditioners located adjacent to his beer, and that he did so, in this court, he paid for beer money, and thereafter he made a statement that he sing out the beer in the beer in the beer and the number of times he received the beer.
④ D D’s witness F did not see the cryp of beer, and himself had been salvists in other Schlages, and there was no order for beer.