All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to Defendant (misunderstanding of facts) 2017No 3481, the former employees at the time

J confirmed that K, P, etc. was an adult with an identification card;

Since the government provided alcoholic beverages with trust and trust, there was no intention to commit the crime of violation of juvenile.

2) Regarding 2017No 3482, the result of the police control was identified as a juvenile even if the Defendant confirmed that he/she was an adult with four identification cards, including E, and provided alcoholic beverages.

In other words, since E, etc. presented forged identification cards or other people's identification cards to the defendant, there was no intention to commit a crime against juveniles.

B. The sentence (the sentence of a fine of KRW 500,000,000) imposed by the prosecutor of the lower judgment on the Defendant is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court below ex officio decided to hold a joint hearing of each appeal case against the defendant.

Each crime of the judgment of the court below is one of the concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a single sentence should be sentenced simultaneously in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

However, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is still subject to a trial by this court, and this is examined.

3. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by each evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court with respect to 2017No. 3481, the Defendant and the employee J did not verify the identification card and sold alcoholic beverages to the juveniles, so the facts charged in this part of the facts charged are found guilty.

1) The J did not consistently confirm the identification card of K, etc. from the investigative agency to the court of the court below. The Defendant did not demand the confirmation of the identification card to himself, and the Defendant did not demand the confirmation of the identification card to him, and the confirmation of the identification card of the customer who appears to be by the Defendant or the employees.