담배사업법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is by the F’s malicious report, and the Defendant has not conducted tobacco retailer business during the period of business suspension as stated in the facts charged.
2. The summary of the facts charged of this case and the summary of the applicable provisions of the facts charged of this case are as follows: although the defendant was designated as a tobacco retailer by the competent authority but was ordered a disposition of business suspension from April 13, 2009 to May 27, 2009 on the ground that he sold tobacco to juveniles, the defendant was indicted for a violation of Article 27-3 subparagraph 1 of the Tobacco Business Act on the ground that he was indicted by the defendant as to the above facts charged of the tobacco retailer business during the period of business suspension on the ground that he sold tobacco to juveniles in violation of Article 12(2) of the Tobacco Business Act on May 24, 2009.
3. Determination
(a) The relevant provisions of the Tobacco Business Act shall be as follows:
Article 12 (Sale of Tobacco) (2) Any person other than a retailer shall not sell tobacco to consumers.
Article 16 (Designation of Retailer) (1) A person who intends to engage in tobacco retail business (referring to the business of selling tobacco directly to consumers) shall be designated by the head of a Si/Gun/Gu having jurisdiction over the location of the place of business.
(2) No person who falls under any of the following subparagraphs shall be designated as a retailer:
5. A person for whom two years have not elapsed since the revocation of designation under Article 17 (1).
(4)