The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. With respect to the violation of the Food Sanitation Act among the facts charged in the instant case (misunderstanding of facts), the court below found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, even though according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, even though the Defendant could have acknowledged the fact that he had engaged in a passenger act, such as flading a light blick around the restaurant in this part of the facts charged (hereinafter referred to as the “instant restaurant”).

2. Determination

A. The lower court held that the employees of the restaurant of this case, which are admissible as evidence consistent with this part of the facts charged, have the CCTV images showing a face-to-face female visitors by committing an act of visitors, and the police K’s legal statement recognizing this case. The summary of the K’s statement, “CCTV images,” specifying the person who satisf as the defendant. While the circumstance is not well memory, the employees of the restaurant of this case designated the person who satisfe and satisf as the defendant.

Women's customers also explained the appearance of a person who has engaged in her mother and child as soon as possible, and the explanation and the defendant were identical.

The approximate increase of a person who has written a hat as soon as possible in CCTV images has been verified, and the same shall apply to the defendant at the present court.

피고인을 직접 만난 것은 사건 발생 당일이 아닌 그 이후이고, 피고인이 빨간 모자를 쓴 것을 본 적은 없다’ 는 것인데, 위 CCTV 영상에 나타난 손님들인 E, F, G의 원심 법정 진술은 대체로 당시 이 사건 음식점에서 칵테일을 준 사람은 피고인이고, 호객행위를 한 사람과 칵테일을 준 사람은 다르다는 내용이고, 피고인의 이 부분 공소사실에 관한 공동 정범으로 함께 약식명령이 청구되어 약식명령이 발령 ㆍ 확정된 H, I의 원심 법정 진술 역시 이에 부합하는 점에 비추어 보면, CCTV 영상사진과 K의 진술만으로 피고인이 이 부분...