logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.04.14 2016고정1724
청소년보호법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. No person who is the summary of the facts charged shall sell drugs harmful to juveniles or provide such drugs free of charge to juveniles;

Nevertheless, around 00:30 on June 1, 2016, the Defendant sold to the juvenile E (17 years) and F (18 years of age) the juvenile-related drugs for KRW 52,00 for 7 concurrently related to the juvenile-related drugs, without confirming the age of 'D' food in Songpa-gu Seoul, Songpa-gu C, and 1st floor.

2. Determination

A. In order for a restaurant operator to constitute “an act of selling alcoholic beverages to juveniles” under Article 51 subparag. 8 of the Juvenile Protection Act by selling alcoholic beverages such as liquors to many persons who entered the restaurant, the restaurant operator should have been aware that the juvenile was included in the day and the restaurant operator had been aware of the fact at the time when he/she puts the alcoholic beverages to the restaurant. Thus, in case where he/she goes together with a juvenile after holding the alcoholic beverages in the only place at the time he/she puts the alcoholic beverages, he/she would have been able to anticipate that the restaurant operator lasts that he/she would go together with the juvenile, or he/she would have been able to have a part of the alcoholic beverages remaining in the first place, unless he/she added the alcoholic beverages to the alcoholic beverages after being combined with the juvenile.

Even if the restaurant operator did an act of selling alcoholic beverages to juveniles;

In light of the above legal principles, according to the health stand, the defendant's legal statement, E, and F's legal statement as to the instant case, each of the above 'D' restaurant', the identification card of 'D' was not verified, and the facts that they drink in the above restaurant are recognized. In light of the above legal principles, the identification card of 'D' is not verified at the time when the defendant's decision was made.

(c)

However, the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court is as follows.

arrow