As a result, the Defendant committed a business that disturbs public morals by allowing the juveniles to sleep in sexual intercourse.

2. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted to the effect that only female youth H, G, I (hereinafter referred to as “H-day administration”), and that male youth E and F brought about only her animals, the Defendant permitted the H-day administration. The Defendant asserts to the effect that he was an adult employee working at H-day administration, and that the E and F was aware of the female employee’s management.

According to each legal statement of the witness J, F, and I, it is recognized that the defendant asked F and E's age to the age of F and E refers to the resident registration number of an adult sentence, E and F refers to the defendant's age, and that E and F bring about only the defendant's injury. The fact that the h's identification card was used by the defendant's adult, while the h's daily activity was covered by the above h's daily activity, and that the E and F expressed that "the h's daily activity was done in a PC with other person, such as H's daily activity, while working in a PC."

In light of the above facts of recognition, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to the effect that both H P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P and E, and the Defendant Ma F is a juvenile, and that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant was married, it is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant was a juvenile, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the criminal intent.

3. If so, the instant facts charged constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act is applicable.