Nevertheless, the court below acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of judgment.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is a general restaurant operator under the trade name of Jung-gu Incheon Metropolitan Government D.

The operators of establishments harmful to juveniles shall, in case where they intend to employ the workers, confirm their ages, and shall not employ the juveniles.

Nevertheless, from May 1, 2012 to June 7, 2012, the Defendant employed youth E (n, 17 years of age) as an employee at the above general restaurant, and employed youth F (17 years of age) as an employee at the above general restaurant from June 4, 2012 to June 7, 2012.

B. Article 2 subparag. 5 of the Juvenile Protection Act provides that the classification of business establishments harmful to juveniles, such as business establishments banned from employing juveniles, shall be based on actual business activities, regardless of whether such business establishments are permitted, authorized, registered, reported, etc. required by other Acts and subordinate statutes. Thus, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below: (i) the number of foodstuffs sold at the instant restaurant was mainly shot and pigs, and (ii) the number of alcoholic beverages sold compared to the number of meat sold at the instant restaurant is small, although considering the fact that E and F worked at the instant restaurant is from 6 p.m. to 10 p., it is reasonable to deem that the instant restaurant is a place where alcoholic beverages are sold incidentally while mainly selling the instant scrap.