The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant’s instant place of business operated by the Defendant is not an entertainment tavern or danran, but a music record and music video production business for many unspecified customers, and customers have to purchase alcoholic beverages at a store and directly bring them into the manufacturing room. However, when the Defendant did not have a store at the time of the instant case, the Defendant was merely holding alcoholic beverages on behalf of them, and thus did not operate an entertainment tavern or dan business without permission, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, which found the Defendant guilty.

2. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, prior to the determination of the defendant's grounds for appeal, the prosecutor changed the previous facts charged as below (amended facts charged). The name of the crime is in violation of the Music Industry Promotion Act. According to Articles 34 (3) 1, 18 (1), 34 (3) 2, 22 (1) 3, and 34 (2) of the Music Industry Promotion Act, according to the prosecutor's application for changes in indictment, the prosecutor omitted Article 34 (2) of the same Act, which is a penal provision, while the prosecutor included "Article 22 (1) 4 of the Music Industry Promotion Act" in the applicable provisions in the application for changes in indictment, although the prosecutor stated "Article 34 (2) of the same Act" as "Article 34 (2) of the same Act in consideration of the contents and purport of the facts charged in this case and its purport, it does not seem that even if the original facts charged were stated "Article 34 (2)."

[Revised Facts of Violation] The Defendant reported the production of music record and music video products in the “Dinematographic Production Room,” located in C. 301 and 302 of the C. Mapo-si.