Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

1. The Defendant of the 2019 High Order 1753 is a person who operates a singing practice hall with the trade name “C” in Gyeonggi-si, Busan.

A singing practice room business operator shall not sell or provide alcoholic beverages, and shall not arrange for employment of a entertainment loan or provide entertainment services.

Nevertheless, on January 4, 2019, the Defendant sold and provided 8 bottles and 1 cans to 5 customers, such as D, who found their places at the singing rooms around 22:10.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the code of practice by selling and providing alcoholic beverages.

2. The defendant 2020 High Order 2157 is a person who operates a singing practice hall in the name of "C" in Bupyeong-si E.

No singing practice room business operator shall sell or provide alcoholic beverages.

Nevertheless, on June 5, 2020, the Defendant sold to F, who had been a guest in the above singing practice place, one alcoholic beverage for 5,000 won per alcoholic beverage to F.

Summary of Evidence

"2019 Highest 1753"

1. The defendant's legal statement in court by witness G;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on site photographs to a written statement prepared by the Defendant’s legal statement of 2020 Godan 2157, which is written by the Defendant’s written statement of H;

1. Selection of a fine, respectively, for a crime under Article 34 (3) 2 and Article 22 (1) 3 of the Music Industry Promotion Act;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act with regard to the order of provisional payment has been already punished twice as a violation of the Music Industry Promotion Act.

In addition, the second-class criminal conduct in the ruling is being prosecuted for the crime No. 1 in the ruling and has been pending in the trial, and it is more likely to be subject to criticism in law.

It is also disadvantageous to the fact that police enforcement has been operated with the door of damage.

However, the defendant is guilty.