Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 300,000 won.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

No one shall sell, lend, or distribute alcoholic beverages that are harmful to juveniles.

Nevertheless, around 18:30 on October 11, 2015, the Defendant sold E (n, 17 years of age), F (n, 16 years of age), G (n, 17 years of age) and one C, etc. in the amount equivalent to 34,000 won, without verifying the age of 34,000 won, at the main point of “D” located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Gangnam-gu.

Summary of Evidence

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

1. Each written statement of E, F, and G [In light of the content of the Juvenile Protection Act and the legislative intent of the Juvenile Protection Act, the main employer is highly strict liability for not selling or providing alcoholic beverages to juveniles for the protection of juveniles. Thus, the main employer must confirm the age of the customer who is likely to be juveniles on the basis of his/her resident registration certificate or other evidence of public probative value equivalent to that of his/her age, unless there are any circumstances that make it difficult to doubt the customer as a juvenile objectively. If the main employer sells or provides alcoholic beverages to juveniles without taking any reasonable measures to confirm age in violation of the duty to confirm age, barring any special circumstance, the employer may be deemed to have had the actual intent to commit a crime of violating the Juvenile Protection Act at least to the main owner of the business, and i.e.,,, E had consistently been found at the main point of the operation of the Defendant on the day of this case by investigation agency and this court, and the Defendant failed to inspect his/her identification card.

The statement is made by the F, F, and G, before October 11, 2015, the date of the instant case in this court, the main points of the Defendant’s operation. However, at that time, the Defendant did not inspect his identification card and did not inspect his identification card on the date of the instant case.