The case holding that it constitutes a singing practice room which is an amusement business affecting the public morals, in case where the person has operated with a video-based device and received admission fees or facility usage fees.

The case holding that the act of running a business with an admission fee or facility usage fee per hour with a video reflector shall be deemed to constitute a singing practice room which is an amusement business affecting the public morals regardless of the act of running a business using the trade name of the tape recorder, if customers wish to do so by using their singing in the compact disc or recorded tape.

Article 2 subparag. 6, Article 5(1) of the Act on the Regulation of Amusement Businesses Affecting Public Morals, Article 2 subparag. 5 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Regulation of Amusement Businesses Affecting

Re-appellant

Daegu District Court Order 96Ra3 dated January 25, 1996

The reappeal is dismissed.

The grounds of reappeal are examined.

According to the records, the re-appellant, while running the recording room business with the trade name of "a non-copic recording room", installed a video recording device in seven rooms with a set of 10,000 won per hour from customers, and recorded in a CD or tape in order for customers to wish, and Article 2 subparagraph 6 of the Act on the Regulation of Amusement Businesses Affecting Public Morals and Article 2 subparagraph 5 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that the re-appellant shall be equipped with the facilities such as a video or non-video recording device so that customers can sing in compliance with the musical contents without any musical playing, and that the re-appellant shall be equipped with a video recording device, and that the re-appellant is engaged in the business of receiving admission fees or facility use fees for each time of 10,000 won, and that the re-appellant's business is subject to a fine for negligence of 1,000 won, regardless of his or her musical recording or tape, and that the re-appellant's business is subject to a fine for negligence of 1, 5.

The order of the court below is just in determining the same purport, and there is no ground for discussing the above legal principles as to the scope and reporting of the singing practice room and the amusement business affecting the public morals under the above Acts and subordinate statutes, and the disposition of the fine for negligence.

Therefore, the reappeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Jeong Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)