No one may act as a broker for entertainment among customers at a place where food service business is operated for profit, while the defendant was demanded from 00:30 on November 10, 2012 to 02:30 on the demand of two customers, such as D, to receive 25,000 won per hour from customers and let them enjoy 25,00 won per hour, and let two non-names and women who have been well-known attend with customers to drink and drink, and encourage them to provide entertainment to customers through singing and dancing.

2. The defendant asserts that although the defendant was demanded by D, a customer, to receive the helper, there was no helper, and he did not appear together with female customers at the time.

In light of the above facts, there is a statement made by D as evidence that seems to correspond to the facts charged. According to D's statement, women who enter the room of D at the time are able to recognize the fact that they drink with D and their daily E and E and singing. In light of the above facts, it is doubtful that the defendant does not act as the broker for the help of the help.

However, the above women received 25,000 won per hour from D or the defendant only by the statements of D and other evidence presented to this court.

It is insufficient to recognize that the defendant promised to receive or receive, and it is difficult to eliminate the possibility of joining with other customers who play in the main place at the time when D work, such as the defendant's vindication, and there is no other evidence to prove the facts charged.

Therefore, the facts charged in this case constitute the absence of proof of crime, and thus, is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.