The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding or misunderstanding of legal principles) of the defendant's restaurant is not provided separately for customers to dance, and there is no fact that the defendant led customers to dance.

Although the fact that customers had a natural dancing while drinking alcohol, it is difficult to view that the defendant operated an entertainment drinking house business without permission on such circumstance alone.

2. Ex officio determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant, the prosecutor examined the case ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant, and the Defendant filed an application for modification of an indictment with respect to the period of the entertainment tavern business from “ August 25, 2013” to “ June 21, 2014,” without permission, for which the Defendant applied for modification of an indictment with respect to the period of the entertainment tavern business from “ August 25, 2013,” and since this court

B. The judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio, but the defendant's assertion of mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and the following is examined.

3. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant

A. The judgment of the court below also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal. However, the court below examined the evidence in its holding, and acknowledged the fact that special lighting facilities, such as a height lighting, sound equipment, and customers, such as the defendant's restaurant, have been provided with an empty space where customers can dance freely at the above empty space whenever the defendant regulates several times, and that the defendant had induced customers to enjoy dancing freely by using sound equipment and special lighting. In light of the above facts, the defendant acknowledged the fact that the restaurant in this case is located in a place where customers are in the main business form to dance, and thus, it is an entertainment drinking club.