On April 7, 2016, no person had sold, leased, distributed, or provided to juveniles drugs and articles harmful to juveniles free of charge. However, the Defendant sold the drugs and articles harmful to juveniles to E (the age of 18) and the drugs and articles harmful to juveniles in the total amount of 66,00 won, such as a beer and beer (the age of 500cc) 2 wre and a beer fly, which are drugs harmful to juveniles, to E (the age of 18) and the latter.

2. Defendant’s assertion and judgment

A. The Defendant’s assertion ordered the Defendant to thoroughly examine the ordinary identification card, and on the day of the instant case, E was employed by the Defendant’s employee during the toilet for the purpose of avoiding the identification card inspection, and thus, the Defendant was not aware of the entry of E as well as the employee in charge of the identification card inspection.

B. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the evidence alone presented by the prosecutor is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant knowingly sold alcoholic beverages, etc. to E with knowledge of a juvenile without performing his/her duty to verify his/her identity while selling softs, etc. as stated in its reasoning, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

① At this Court stated that “E was a university student of both her own and her own behaviors, and was only a mixed minor since the date of the instant case, E was a minor, and thus, he/she was in the toilet to avoid an identification card inspection in order to put together her and drinking together.”

② In CCTV images taken inside the Defendant’s shop on April 7, 2016, E entered the Defendant’s shop in the front of 3 women’s day-to- day-day, and six male-day day-to-days of E after locking.