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

The Defendant is a person who operates a general restaurant in the name of “D” in Chuncheon City C.

From around 00:00 to 04:00 on March 15, 2013, the Defendant sold 5 juveniles E (17 years of age), F (17 years of age), G (16 years of age), H (16 years of age), and I (15 years of age), and provided 5 soldiers with 5 diseases, who are drugs harmful to juveniles, for profit.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness G, H and I;

1. Partial statement of witness E;

1. Each police statement made to H, E, G, and I;

1. A written statement;

1. Each investigation report (related to the statements of juveniles, the statement of police officers in mobilization, confirmation of sales details, and photographing and attaching them);

1. A copy of a business report, a copy of a control report on a public morals place of business, and a receipt;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to restaurant photographs, juvenile photographs, sales details photographs and photographs;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 59 subparagraph 6 and 28 (1) of the Juvenile Protection Act which choose a penalty;

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

1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order

1. The defendant and his defense counsel demanded the above D's identification card presentation to E prior to the instant case, and therefore, E was believed to be adult by presenting a forged identification card that was born in 93 years and J, and all juveniles together with E at the time of the instant case did not constitute a crime merely because they were the relatives of E and do not confirm additional identification card.

2. In full view of the above evidence and the defendant's statements, witness K, L's statements and each investigation agency's statements, and M/N's investigation agency's statements, the possibility that E, like the defendant's allegations, had been engaged in D restaurants prior to the instant case, would have presented 93 years old and J identification cards at the time of the instant case.

On the other hand, E is a photograph of identification card.