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

Any person who intends to run an entertainment bar business shall obtain permission from a competent authority.

Nevertheless, on April 3, 2012, at around 23:00, Defendant and E conspired with each other without obtaining permission, and around 418.78 square meters in the name of “G” on the first floor of the Gangnam-gu Seoul FF, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, with five and sound and reflective facilities, and mainly prepare and sell alcoholic beverages, such as sharers, and alcohol, such as sharers, to two customers H, etc., and with employment of entertainment workers I, the said H et al. engaged in entertainment bar business by allowing the said entertainment workers to drink alcohol along with the said I, and to sing or dance together with sound and reflect facilities.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement of the police suspect interrogation protocol against the accused;

1. Some statements of the police suspect interrogation protocol regarding E;

1. Statement of the police interrogation protocol of I made to the police officer (the statement that he/she had a job to attract his/her customer while serving as an employee at the main point of this case, offered alcoholic beverages by attracting him/her, and presented him/her with his/her job for entertainment);

1. A letter of arrest of a flagrant offender (E);

1. A criminal investigation report (general);

1. Report on the result of confirmation of the non-dispositionable telephone (a copy of summary order); and

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing business reporting certificates;

1. Article 94 Subparag. 3 and Article 37(1) of the former Food Sanitation Act (Amended by Act No. 11986, Jul. 30, 2013); Article 30 of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts;

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

1. The portion not guilty under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. The Defendant and E conspired to commit this part of the facts charged and carried on entertainment bar business in the same manner as indicated in the judgment from July 18, 201 to April 23, 2012.

2. As shown in the reasoning of the judgment, there is a report on the result of confirmation of the disposal unclaimed telephone (a copy of the summary order) as well as a summary order issued by the Defendant on April 18, 201 as the fact that the Defendant had engaged in the danran business at a place indicated in the facts charged was issued a summary order of KRW 1 million on July 15, 201.

(b).