Whether the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on Sound Records, Video Products, and Game Software, which prohibits access by juveniles under the age of 18, constitutes "where special provisions are stipulated in other Acts and subordinate statutes concerning access by juveniles" under Article 19 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Protection of Juveniles, allowing access by juveniles under the age of 18 (affirmative)

Article 24 (3) of the former Juvenile Protection Act (amended by Act No. 6146 of Jan. 12, 200) provides that "where a juvenile is accompanied by a person with parental authority, etc.", Article 24 (1) of the former Juvenile Protection Act (amended by Act No. 614 of Jan. 12, 200) provides that "the former Juvenile Protection Act (amended by Act No. 5817 of Feb. 5, 199 and enforced on July 1, 199) shall be interpreted as "the former Juvenile Protection Act No. 100 (amended by Act No. 5297 of Mar. 7, 1997)" and "the former Juvenile Protection Act No. 10 (amended by Act No. 6146 of Jan. 16, 200) provides that "the former Act shall take precedence over any other Act in regulating harmful environments for juveniles," and it shall be interpreted as "the above provision No. 2 of the former Juvenile Protection Act shall apply to the above provision. 10-mentioned provision.

Article 2 subparag. 1 and Article 6 of the Juvenile Protection Act (Amended by Act No. 5297, Mar. 7, 1997); Article 2 subparag. 1 and Article 6 of the Juvenile Protection Act (Amended by Act No. 5817, Feb. 5, 199); Article 1 of the Addenda of the former Juvenile Protection Act (Amended by Act No. 6146, Jan. 12, 200); Article 1, subparag. 1 and 5(a) and Article 24(2) and (3) of the former Juvenile Protection Act; Article 19 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Juvenile Protection Act (Amended by Presidential Decree No. 16751, Mar. 13, 200); Article 2 subparag. 1 and Article 6 of the former Sound Records, Video Products and Game Products Act (Amended by Act No. 6186, Jan. 21, 200); Article 19 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Sound Records and Video Products Act (Amended by Act No. 51 and Game Products)

For early return;

Head of Daegu Metropolitan City Central Government

Daegu District Court Decision 2000Gu2892 delivered on November 23, 2000

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s disposition of imposing a penalty surcharge of KRW 6,00,000 against the Plaintiff on December 10, 199 shall be revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment below is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. Details of the instant disposition

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or may be acknowledged by each entry in Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1-1 to 6, and there is no counter-proof.

A. From May 1, 1997, the Plaintiff was running a video room business with the trade name of 55-23, Daegu Jung-gu fair video room, and around November 19, 1999, at around 19:00, the Plaintiff entered the 15th office of the above establishment, where Nonparty 1, who was a juvenile, paid a charge of KRW 2,00,00 to Nonparty 1, who was a juvenile, Kim Jong-young (Y, 18), and Kim (Y, 18), and Kim (Y, 18), who was a juvenile, to enter the 16th office of the above establishment, and was admitted to the 15th office of the above establishment.

B. As to the plaintiff on December 10, 199 (which appears to be a clerical error in the statement of claim, November 19, 199), the defendant imposed penalty surcharge of KRW 6,00,000 under [Attachment 6] subparagraph 4 of the former Juvenile Protection Act (amended by Act No. 6146, Jan. 12, 200; hereinafter referred to as the "Act") on the ground that the plaintiff's act constitutes Article 24 (2) of the former Juvenile Protection Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 16751, Mar. 13, 200); Article 40 (1) [Attachment 6] subparagraph 4 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Juvenile Protection Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 16751, Mar. 13, 200);

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

(a) A captain;

The defendant asserts that the disposition of this case is a legitimate disposition pursuant to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, and the plaintiff, (1) Article 24 (3) of the Act provides that "where a juvenile is accompanied by a person with parental authority, etc. notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (2), a juvenile may have access under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree." Accordingly, Article 19 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act provides that "where a juvenile is accompanied by a person with parental authority, etc., pursuant to other Acts and subordinate statutes, and where other Acts and subordinate statutes provide special provisions concerning juvenile access, such other Acts and subordinate statutes shall govern." Meanwhile, according to the Acts and subordinate statutes on sound records, video products, game products, and game software, this provision provides that "the person who has lost access to a video product under 18 years of age shall be prohibited from having access" and "where other Acts and subordinate statutes provide special provisions concerning juvenile access, it is unlawful in that it excludes the application of this case's discretionary authority from 19 years of age or older, the defendant seems to have violated the law's discretionary authority."

B. Relevant statutes

(1) Article 1 of the Act provides that "The purpose of this Act is to regulate the distribution of media materials, drugs, etc. harmful to juveniles and their access to harmful business establishments, and protect and relieve them from the harmful environment including harmful acts such as violence and abuse against juveniles so that juveniles can grow into healthy character." Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Act provides that "juvenile" refers to a person under the age of 19 years. The term "business establishment harmful to juveniles" refers to a person under the age of 19 years. Article 2 subparagraph 5 of the Act provides that "business establishment harmful to juveniles" refers to any of the following business establishments (hereinafter referred to as "business establishment harmful to juveniles' access and employment") that are identified as harmful to juveniles. In this case, the classification of the business establishment shall be based on the actual act of juveniles regardless of permission, authorization, registration, report, etc. required by other Acts and subordinate statutes. Article 2 subparagraph 2 of the Act provides that "the person who has access to the business establishment is prohibited from entering or leaving the business establishment."

(ii)On the other hand, Article 24, paragraph 3 of the Act provides that "If a juvenile is accompanied by a person of parental authority, notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 2, it shall be allowed to enter under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree," and Article 19 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act provides that "where other Acts and subordinate statutes permit access if a juvenile is accompanied by a person of parental authority, etc. pursuant to Article 24, paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Act, or where other Acts and subordinate statutes provide special provisions concerning access by a juvenile, such other Acts and subordinate statutes shall

(3) The main sentence of Article 49(1) of the Act provides that "the Commission on Youth Protection may impose and collect a penalty surcharge not exceeding 10 million won on a person who obtains a benefit from an act falling under any of the subparagraphs of Article 51 under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree." Article 51 of the Act provides that "the person who gains a benefit from an act falling under any of the subparagraphs of Article 51 shall have access to a harmful business establishment in violation of the provisions of Articles 7 through 24(1)." Article 49(2) of the Act provides that "the amount of a penalty surcharge under the provisions of paragraph (1) and other necessary matters shall be prescribed by the Presidential Decree." Article 40(1) of the Enforcement Decree provides that "the amount of a penalty surcharge according to the category of an offense subject to the imposition of a penalty surcharge pursuant to the provisions of Article 49(2) of the Act shall be as stated in [Attachment 6] 4 and 24 of the Act provides that "the amount of a penalty surcharge shall be reduced by 300 won and 200."

(4) Article 2 subparagraph 5 (b) (1) of the former Sound Records, Video Products and Game Software Act (amended by Act No. 6186 of Jan. 21, 200; hereinafter referred to as the "former Sound Records, etc.") provides that the business of running a video-viewing establishment is a business (excluding a performance hall business under the Public Performance Act) which provides video products with video products and audio-visual viewing equipment and provides them for viewing (including a case where users operate and use the viewing equipment directly). Article 8 subparagraph 5 of the former Sound Records, Video Products and Game Software Act provides that "the distributor shall observe the matters prescribed by the Presidential Decree other than those of subparagraphs 1 through 4 in order to maintain a sound business order." Article 14 of the Enforcement Decree of the Sound Records, Video Products and Game Software Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Enforcement Decree of the Sound Records, etc.") provides that the distributor's compliance with Article 8 subparagraph 5 of the former Sound Records, etc. Act shall be prohibited from entering the entrance and exit of a video product.

(c) Markets:

(1) As to the Plaintiff’s assertion

(a)As seen above, Article 24(3) of the Act provides that "it shall be allowed for juveniles to enter if the juveniles are accompanied by persons with parental authority, etc. notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (2) of this Article." Accordingly, Article 19 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act provides that "where other Acts and subordinate statutes permit juveniles to be accompanied by persons with parental authority, etc. pursuant to Article 24(2) and (3) of the Act, and where other Acts and subordinate statutes provide that "where juveniles are allowed to be accompanied by persons with parental authority, etc., they shall be governed by other Acts

(B)First of all, as to whether the above provision of the law is a limited provision or an example provision, and ① as to whether the former Juvenile Protection Act (amended by Act No. 5817 of Feb. 5, 1999) is in force since July 1, 199, the first provision of Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Act (amended by Act No. 5297 of Mar. 7, 1997) shall be applied in order to raise the age provision of the 'juvenile under 18 years of age and under 19 years of age to less than 19 years of age in regulating the environments harmful to juveniles, first of all, it shall be applied in preference to other Acts in regulating the environments harmful to juveniles.' It shall be interpreted that the above provision of the above provision of the law shall be interpreted as "in addition to the above provision of the law, it shall be interpreted that the provision of the above provision of the law shall be applied in preference to other Acts and subordinate statutes, and it shall be interpreted as the provision of the above provision of the provision of the law.

(c)Therefore, Article 19 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act provides that "where other Acts and subordinate statutes provide for access by juveniles, it shall be governed by the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes." Furthermore, as seen above, the former Music Records, etc. Act and the Enforcement Decree of the same Act allow access by juveniles of the age of 18, such as this case, in the case of video watching room businesses, it is unlawful in this regard without further review of the remaining dispositions.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case seeking the cancellation of the disposition of this case shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and the decision of the court below is justified on the basis of its conclusion, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant who has lost.

Judges Park Tae-ho (Presiding Judge)