The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) examined the identification card of E, etc. by G, an employee of the defendant, and E, etc. had adult identification card at the time.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the fact that the Defendant or employees G did not examine the identification card of E, etc. and sold alcoholic beverages to E, etc. is recognized.

1) E does not have to consistently confirm the identification card from the investigative agency to the original court’s court, “E” at the main point operated by the Defendant on March 8, 2014.

In the preceding day, he did not conduct the identification card inspection on the above main points.

ii) The police stated that “the Defendant was sent back to the rear door of the business where the crackdown was held by the Defendant,” and iii) the court of the court below held that “the Defendant’s drinking house operated by the Defendant was an identification card inspection, so it is a place where the minors can move to the said drinking house.”

2) At the lower court court’s court, F stated that “The Defendant or his employee did not confirm the age of the Defendant or his/her employer, while leaving the main place that he/she operated with E, etc. on March 8, 2014.” 3) At the time of the instant case, the police officer dispatched to the Defendant’s main place of the instant case changed the Australia, etc., but E did not have an identification card.

B. Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.