If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

The defendant is a person who is engaged in entertainment entertainment business under the trade name of Dong-gu Seoul Metropolitan City C.

No person shall drink alcoholic beverages with customers, provide entertainment services to customers by dancing, or mediate such acts to other persons at a place where food service business is conducted for profit.

Nevertheless, around 23:20 on February 17, 2012, the Defendant, at the above “C” around February 17, 2012, violated the code of practice for Maitius by dividing three diseases with D customers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. A written report and a written statement of DNA preparation;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. Determination on the Defendant’s assertion of each video CD

1. The gist of the assertion is that the Defendant did not refuse to refuse to drink frighten to customers with D’s attitudes at the time, and did not engage in entertainment for customers.

2. According to the aforementioned evidence, such as the testimony by the witness D in the court, etc., the Defendant, as well as the witness D’s 18-minute customer D, is able to recognize the fact that the Defendant, as a result of the division of conversations between approximately 18-minute customer D, had a chance to drink and drink together. Accordingly, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant, along with the customer, engaged in entertainment with the customer.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant laws concerning criminal facts, Articles 98 and 44(3) of the Food Sanitation Act, and selection of fines;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;