logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.05.18 2017노1959
청소년보호법위반
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, misunderstanding of facts, demanded E to present an identification card.

In addition, since the defendant sold 1 bottle and 3 residues to 2 juvenile delinquents such as E, the quantity of alcoholic beverages sold to juvenile E is 1 bottle and 1 beer per week.

B. The defendant believed that 2 persons who presented adult identification cards are friendship E, and there is no intention to commit a violation of the Juvenile Protection Act.

B. The court below did not render any judgment as to the assertion that the defendant requested E to produce identification cards and that E did not have any negligence in finding the fact that he was a juvenile. The court below erred in the misapprehension of judgment.

(c)

The punishment sentenced by the court below (one million won) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below related to the demand for identification card, the defendant is found to have requested the presentation of identification card to E at the time of the instant case, but it is found that the defendant can be found to have dolusent intention about the violation of the Juvenile Protection Act by selling alcoholic beverages to juveniles to E without taking any additional proper measures for age verification in the circumstance where it is probable that E is a juvenile, without taking any additional measures for age verification. Thus, there is an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts in the judgment of the court below.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit (Provided, That the fact that the defendant requested to present identification card to E is reflected as correcting the facts constituting the crime of the court below as follows). 2) If the defendant ordered the drinking on the restaurant, including the quantity of the alcoholic beverages sold, and the juvenile is expected to drink together with the daily drinking, and the juvenile actually sold the drinking to the drinking.

arrow