(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.06.17 2015노4525 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.06.17 2015노4525

식품위생법위반

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. In light of the appearance of the scene of the crime, the background of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, which are acknowledged by the evidence presented as the gist of the grounds for appeal, even though the defendant was found to have violated the matters to be observed by singing with the customers, including E, using sound and reflective facilities, the court below acquitted the facts charged in this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a person who operates Ansan-si member B, and C’s “C” 1st floor located underground in Ansan-si.

No general restaurant business operator shall be equipped with sound and rebuttal facilities and allow customers to sing.

Nevertheless, from February 2, 2015 to around 23:00 on the same day, the Defendant violated the business operator’s code of practice by having two male customers with a name infinite, who found the place within the same Raba, use sound and reflective facilities.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the court below, the court below found the defendant guilty of the charges of this case on the ground that the defendant, as the defendant's address, had constructed the wall of Rabda and soundproofing plates at the time of the present case, and the defendant, E, and F, who was the defendant's seat, completed the construction, and had singing by using sound and reflect facilities installed in Rabro in Rabro, the beer, which were installed in Rabro, and the beer in Rabro, and the defendant at the time of the present case, could only recognize the fact that the defendant did not engage in Lbrop business for ordinary customers, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant allowed ordinary customers to practice singing using sound and reflect facilities, as shown in the facts charged of this case.

(c)

The court below duly adopted and investigated the judgment of the court below.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2015.07.23 2015고정747

-부산지방법원 2014.05.15 2014고정93

-수원지방법원안산지원 2020.09.24 2020고정678

-부산지방법원 2021.04.22 2020고정1383

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2020.01.10 2019고정831