The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the Defendants.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal consistently states that the Defendants did not require the presentation of identification cards in the event of the slaughter of tobacco at the convenience store of this case.

In addition, F made the hair color and cremation at the time of this case.

Even if it is a middle school student who is merely 15 years of age, it is difficult to mistake him as an adult.

On the other hand, the witness G, consistent with the Defendants’ assertion, cannot be deemed to be representing the F among many customers, and the Defendant A also stated to the effect that he would have made it such because he had expressed to the other students the name of his identification card as a Chinese characters. Therefore, it is difficult to believe this as it is.

According to the evidence, including the F's statement, the Defendants are bound to be aware that the F is a juvenile.

Nevertheless, the court below acquitted the facts charged of this case due to erroneous mistake of facts.

2. Determination

A. According to the Defendants’ respective legal statements, F’s statement in the second trial records and CCTV photographs, it is recognized that Defendant A sold tobacco to F without confirming the identity card on the day of the instant case, but it is difficult to believe F’s police statements to the effect that the Defendants did not conduct an identification inspection at the time of the first purchase of tobacco in light of F’s legal statement. G working with Defendant A at the convenience store of this case stated that Defendant A confirmed F’s identity card before the instant case and sold tobacco. In light of these circumstances, Defendant A sold tobacco to F with knowledge that it was not a juvenile, and therefore, it is difficult to deem that Defendant A sold tobacco to F with any intent concerning the sale of drugs harmful to juveniles on the day of the instant case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.