I stated that the defendant made a statement, and the J also stated that the defendant's telephone number is the helper if the customer wants because he had a book.

In light of the ordinary meaning of the word “sing-to-sing-sing-s-to-s-to-s-to-s-to-s-to-s-to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s- to-s

Ultimately, the facts charged of this case are sufficiently proven.

The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2. To be found guilty of the facts charged in the instant case, it should be proven without any reasonable doubt that there was obscene act in the instant entertainment business establishment, and that the Defendant, who run the said entertainment business, engaged in “the act of inducing, arranging, or providing obscene act” prohibited by Article 3 subparag. 2 of the Act on the Regulation of Customs and Business.

The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the instant facts charged on the ground that the evidence presented by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the Defendant had engaged in obscene acts, such as similar acts, etc., to H, I, F, and G, and that there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise. According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court and the first instance court, the instant facts charged was proven to the extent that there

It is difficult to see

The judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there are errors in the misapprehension of facts alleged by the prosecutor.

subsection (b) of this section.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is without merit.