logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.05.29 2012고단6133
식품위생법위반
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 7,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

The Defendants respectively.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is a business owner of an entertainment drinking house located in the 'G' located in the 'F 1st floor' in Gangnam-gu Seoul, and the 'H' located in the 1st floor of the above building is a general restaurant business owner.

A person who runs a business of entertainment tavern shall report to the competent authority on insignificant matters that are prescribed by Presidential Decree, with the exception of important matters prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Nevertheless, from April 12, 2012 to April 22, 2012, the Defendants conspired to commit the same year.

6. From November 21, 21:30 to the above general restaurant, the room and waiting room of the H “H” general restaurant are equipped with one room and other business equipment, and used the room and waiting room of the h” general restaurant as the atmosphere of female visitors employed by the entertainment drinking house in the “G”, and the H” general restaurant created and supplied the studs ordered by the said entertainment drinking house at the kitchen of the h. general restaurant, and had customers in the said entertainment drinking house drink alcohol at the H’s general restaurant, thereby running entertainment drinking business outside the permitted area by substantially engaging in business activities of the h’s entertainment drinking house.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired to engage in the business of “H” general restaurants by doing business at “G” entertainment taverns without reporting to the competent authorities, and expanded the business area outside the permitted area.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each legal statement of the witness I, J, B, and K;

1. Each prosecutor's interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. The Defendants asserted to the effect that they engaged in their own business and did not commit the above crimes. As such, in particular, all the circumstances acknowledged according to the above evidence, including: (a) Defendant B is a business owner in the name of the above “H” general restaurant; (b) Defendant A is a business owner in the name of the above general restaurant; but (c) Defendant A was not aware of the specific business status; and (d) Defendant A’s own rent for the above general restaurant.

arrow