A. In the case of a misunderstanding of facts, the Defendant: (a) did not have had a juvenile, E, G, or I employed a juvenile as an entertainment worker and had the said juvenile receive entertainment; (b) the lower court accepted the facts charged in this case and convicted the Defendant; and (c) the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 80 hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts: (i) G and I entered the investigative agency into the D main points in contact with the date and time limit set forth in the facts charged of this case until the court below held the court; (ii) 20 women, who were in charge of the Kater, at the time, did not confirm their age, such as demanding an identification card inspection; and (iii) 60,000 won, were sent to entertainment and received 60,000 won (the investigation record, 78,79, 106-108 pages); and (iv) 5 weeks were made at the investigative agency to make a statement and make a statement at the 15th anniversary of the facts charged of this case (the above investigation record, 13,18 pages; 78, 79, 106-108 pages); and (iv) 5 weeks were made at the same time with G and I; and (iv) 15 weeks were made at the same time to enter the investigation agency and make a statement.