The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

At the time of the instant case, the Defendant, as to the summary of the grounds for appeal, confirmed all of his identification cards upon ordering juvenile E and F’s order, and all of them had adult identification cards, so there was no intention to sell liquor to the Defendant.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and affected the conclusion of the judgment.

The sentence (700,000 won) imposed by the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The Defendant in the facts charged of this case is a person who works as an employee from "D cafeteria in the Goyang-gu Seoul 1st floor" as an employee.

A person is prohibited from selling, lending, distributing, or providing to juveniles drugs, etc. harmful to juveniles without compensation. However, around March 10, 2015, the Defendant sold to E (n, 17 years old) and F (n, 17 years old), a juvenile-related juvenile-related juvenile-related juvenile-related drugs at the above restaurant around 04:00 on March 10, 2015.

The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by integrating the evidence presented in its judgment.

The burden of proof for the facts constituting an offense prosecuted in a criminal trial for the above deliberation is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction for guilt is to be based on evidence with probative value that makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt for guilt against the defendant, it is inevitable to determine the defendant as the benefit of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 91Do1385, Aug. 13, 1991; 2002Do562, Dec. 24, 2002). Such determination by the court below is difficult to accept in the following respects.

According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the following circumstances are recognized:

The defendant is first in an investigative agency.