Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

No person shall sell, lend, distribute, or provide free of charge drugs, etc. harmful to juveniles to juveniles.

Nevertheless, on September 29, 2016, the Defendant, at around 23:00 on September 29, 2016, sold 3 Byung-ju and 2 Byung-ju, a juvenile harmful drug, without verifying the age by confirming the identification card to the E (V, the age of 17) and one other, who was a juvenile from a restaurant operated by the Defendant in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F and E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on detection (violation of Juvenile Protection Act);

1. Article 59 Subparag. 6 of the former Juvenile Protection Act (Amended by Act No. 14446, Dec. 20, 2016); the main text of Article 28(1) and the selection of fines for criminal facts;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel found him guilty of Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act that the defendant had not verified his identification card of F and E, who were juveniles at the time, but had previously inspected his identification card.

However, the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, i.e., ① the witness E consistently states to the effect that the Defendant’s restaurant is drinking alcohol but does not have any identification card inspection, etc. at one time from the investigation process to the trial process, and the witness F states to the same purport; ② the E states that some of the price for food, etc. at the restaurant was insufficient, as argued by the Defendant, but E states that it was only known to the address at that time, and that E states that there was no other identification card, as argued by the Defendant, and ③ the E and F states prior to the instant case.