A. Fact-misunderstanding and misapprehension of legal principles did not confirm identification cards to three juveniles, including E, and the Defendant did not sell alcoholic beverages without verifying identification cards, G during his/her daily work was an adult, and H and I was an adult around January 1, 2017 at the time when the alcohol price was approved, and thus did not meet the requirements for establishing a crime of violating the Juvenile Protection Act, but the lower court convicted this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. The sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court’s determination 1 on the assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine 1) in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the adopted evidence, the lower court determined that the Defendant’s act of selling alcoholic beverages without verifying the identification card to three juveniles, including E, as stated in the judgment of the lower court, constitutes a crime if the Defendant provided alcoholic beverages to juveniles as an intention to sell them, and thus, the act of selling H and I constitutes the element of the crime of violating the Juvenile Protection Act.

A) E makes a statement at an investigative agency that “I and three persons of his/her her son and her son around December 31, 2016 drink and drinked about KRW 80,00,00,00, such as her son and her son and her son.” However, E made a concrete statement about the Defendant’s act and her situation before and after the commission of the Defendant; E tried to reverse the statement in favor of the Defendant at the Defendant’s request; E made a false statement even when I took charge of a punishment without prison labor in light of the investigative agency’s attitude to make a false statement.

Therefore, credibility is recognized.

B) The F stated that “the Defendant was at the time and was aware of the fact that E was about drinking alcohol,” and G, H, and I also defective the identification card inspection in the form of knowing that the Defendant was a minor.

H. H.