The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding) is that the Defendant merely ice the alcoholic beverages, which are drugs harmful to juveniles, to G and E, according to the direction of the employer I that they are not juveniles, and the Defendant did not intend to commit the facts charged of this case, and the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a person who works as Cju employee. On November 21, 2012, the Defendant sold 33,000 won, such as 6 illness of small-be drugs harmful to juveniles, and 33,000 won, such as 6 illness of small-be drugs harmful to juveniles, and 5,00 won, regardless of the fact that the Defendant was prohibited from selling drugs harmful to juveniles at the Cju store located in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City around November 20, 2012.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the grounds of the police interrogation protocol, G, and E’s written statements, etc.

C. The evidence submitted by the prosecutor to prove the facts charged in the instant case is a voluntary performance report, voluntary performance statement, control statement, G, and E written statement, a police suspect interrogation protocol, investigation report, and attached materials, etc.

When there is a reason to suspect that the confession of a defendant does not have been voluntarily stated, the admissibility of evidence of confession is denied (Article 309 of the Criminal Procedure Act), and according to the records of the first trial protocol of the court below, the defendant does not properly open his/her resident registration number, and even according to the testimony of the witness I of the court below, the defendant may recognize the fact that he/she is a son who is aware of reading the writing.

Among the above evidence, the voluntary statement of conduct, voluntary statement of conduct, control manual, and the police interrogation protocol of the defendant against the defendant stated that the defendant recognized the facts charged of this case, but it appears in light of the level of the defendant's intellectual property.