The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the Defendant was unaware of the fact that D/E was a juvenile, the Defendant had no intention to sell alcoholic beverages to the juvenile.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the defendant by misunderstanding the facts.

B. Even if the sentencing is found to be guilty, the lower court’s punishment (amounting to KRW 300,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the legislative intent of the Juvenile Protection Act regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the owner and employees of a business establishment that sells alcoholic beverages, etc. are subject to very strict responsibility for not selling alcoholic beverages to juveniles for the protection of juveniles. Thus, barring any circumstances that make it difficult to doubt the person who entered the business establishment is likely to be juveniles from an objective perspective, the subject’s age should be confirmed based on resident registration certificates or evidence with public probative value of age to the extent that the person is likely to be juveniles.

If a business owner or employee sells alcoholic beverages to a juvenile due to his/her violation of the duty to verify the age and failing to take any measures to confirm the age, barring any special circumstance, at least dolusent intent of the violation of the Juvenile Protection Act due to the violation of the said provision shall be recognized to the business owner or employee (Supreme Court Decision 2003Do8039 Decided April 23, 2004, Supreme Court Decision 2007Do770 Decided November 16, 2007), barring any special circumstance (Supreme Court Decision 2007Do770 Decided November 23, 2007). Even if the Defendant’s statement is based on the Defendant’s statement, the Defendant did not take measures to confirm the age of the juvenile, as it was committed by the adult Justice, and it cannot be said that there is any circumstance to be objectively doubtful as a juvenile. Rather, the above circumstance alone is merely a person who has become adult (K) and is not a juvenile.

Therefore, the defendant D.