No one shall sell drugs, etc. harmful to juveniles to juveniles.

Nevertheless, on May 6, 2015, the Defendant sold to 8,000 if the Defendant, at the main point of “E” located in Ansan-si D and 3, a youth, F (17 tax), G (17 tax), H (17 tax), and I (17 tax) for KRW 8,00.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

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

1. Determination of the defendant and defense counsel's assertion of some of the witness J's legal statement

1. The alleged defendant and his defense counsel requested the juvenile to produce identification cards at the time of the crime of this case, and all adult identification cards were possessed, and thus the defendant did not have intention to violate the Juvenile Protection Act.

The argument is asserted.

2. In light of the legislative intent of the Juvenile Protection Act, unless there are circumstances that make it difficult to doubt as a juvenile objectively, the owner or employee of a business establishment that sells harmful drugs must verify the age of a juvenile subject to the relevant evidence with public probative value of age (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 93Do2914, Jan. 14, 1994; 2002Do2425, Jun. 28, 2002). If there is a doubt that the pictures and objects on the resident registration certificates presented by the relevant person are different from those on the resident registration certificates, the case requiring a juvenile to purchase alcoholic beverages whose status and age are reduced and who are harmful to the juvenile, in light of the fact that there is a large number of cases where the relevant person's business owner is a duty to request the juvenile to purchase alcoholic beverages on the resident registration certificates in detail, or to view them as their address or resident registration numbers on the resident registration certificates, barring special circumstances.