The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal was not confirmed by E at the time of the instant appeal, but at the time of the first visit by E to verify the identification card, as E was an adult, there was no intention to commit a crime of violating the Juvenile Protection Act against the Defendant, since E was an adult.

2. Determination

A. The lower court found the Defendant’s criminal intent in full view of the following circumstances.

① The court of the court below stated that “A” in the court of the court below’s testimony that “A” in the court of the court below, “A” only shows the Republic of Korea students’ identification card while having been fested with the Defendant, and that the Defendant did not have inspected the identification card (the above student identification card alone cannot be confirmed). ② G visiting the restaurant of this case over two occasions before the instant case, “A” in the police and the court of the court of the court below, stating that “A” did not have any objective evidence to support the Defendant’s assertion that “A” was “A” (However, H accompanied with E only requested the Defendant’s identification card at the police at the time, but only stated that A did not have any identification card, and that the court of the court of the court of the court of the court below stated that the Defendant did not have any identification card to E, and that “A” did not have any objective evidence to support the Defendant’s assertion that “A” was forged.

B. As a result of a thorough examination of the records of the judgment of the political party, the following circumstances that the court below properly states are acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., the defendant stated in the investigative agency that "the defendant tried to verify the identity of the defendant with her husband because he/she was her age at any time when E was the second," and the defendant at that time "F at that time."