The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, at the time of the instant case, an employee had dolusence in selling alcoholic beverages to the employee, and the Defendant is liable to pay attention to and exercise supervision over such employee’s act.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts or by misapprehending legal principles, which affected the conclusion of judgment

2. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that the evidence presented by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant, a business owner, was negligent in giving due attention and supervision to the pertinent business in order to prevent the employee from selling alcohol to juveniles, and that there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

In light of the records, the above measures by the court below are just and there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts or by misunderstanding legal principles which affected the judgment.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.