Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

1. The Defendant violating the Juvenile Protection Act is a person who operates entertainment centers in the name of “E” in Bupyeong-si D.

The owner of a business harmful to juveniles shall not employ juveniles.

Nevertheless, around March 16, 2017 and around April 14, 2017, the Defendant employed the F, a juvenile, at the above entertainment entertainment establishments, which are juvenile harmful establishments, respectively.

2. No person who conducts entertainment establishments in violation of the Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act shall have a person who fails to undergo a medical examination for sexually transmitted infectious diseases, engage in such business;

Nevertheless, on March 16, 2017 and April 14, 2017, the Defendant employed the “E” operated by the Defendant in Seocheon-si D, Seocheon-si, which did not undergo a medical examination for sexual infectious diseases, and had the Defendant engage in entertainment entertainment service.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's legal statement (as at the third public trial date);

1. Legal statement of the witness F, and some of the witness G legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of suspect with respect to F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the list of employees, site, and permits;

1. Article 58 Subparag. 4 of the Act on the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases and Articles 29(1)(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da1248, Apr. 1, 201); Articles 81 Subparag. 9 and 45(2) of the Act on the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da124, Apr

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act was found to have been erroneous on the third public trial date.

There was no conclusive intention for each crime.

There is no criminal history prior to the instant case.

However, the crime of this case in which age young juveniles are employed as entertainment entertainment service providers is very bad and social harm, and thus, cannot be charged for the reason that the crime of this case is an initial crime.

The defendant.