logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2017.11.22 2017고정577
청소년보호법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who operates a general restaurant under the trade name of "E cafeteria" in Seongbuk-gu, Manam-si.

No person shall sell or lend drugs, etc. harmful to juveniles to juveniles or provide them free of charge.

Nevertheless, at around 22:00 on November 20, 2016, the Defendant sold to juvenile F (F, 18 years old) a juvenile harmful drug at KRW 36,00,00 for Eslives of Eslives of Eslives of 3 C, 4 C, and 4 C, a juvenile harmful drug.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statements by witnesses F and G in each of these courts;

1. Reporting on occurrence (violation of the Juvenile Protection Act);

1. The defendant asserts to the effect that there was no intention in violation of the Juvenile Protection Act since he/she sold alcoholic beverages to the F, as he/she was a adult, because the F was the person himself/herself as an adult.

However, as claimed by the defendant, the family F is of the age of the person.

In light of the legislative purpose of the Juvenile Protection Act, etc., the defendant, who sells a drug harmful to juveniles, is liable to verify the age of the juvenile who conceals the age, such as an identification card, and if he/she neglected to do so, he/she is liable to commit a crime of violating the Juvenile Protection Act.

According to each of the above evidence, the defendant did not examine the F's identification card or neglected to do so. Thus, the above assertion is rejected.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 59 of the relevant Act and Articles 59 subparagraph 6 and 28 (1) of the Juvenile Protection Act, the selection of fines for criminal facts, and the selection of fines;

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

1. It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds of Article 334(1) or more of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow