The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (two years of suspended sentence for four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the defendant ex officio, the indictment shall be permitted only to the extent that the identity of the facts charged is recognized, and where there is an application for modification of a indictment to the effect that the facts charged are added to the facts charged, the court shall dismiss the application for modification of the indictment (Article 298(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act). The identity of the facts charged is maintained as it is if it is the same in the basic point of view in that the social factual relations, which form the basis of the facts charged, are basic. However, in determining the identity of such basic factual relations, the act of the defendant and its social factual relations shall be based in consideration of the function of the identity

(2) On March 22, 1994, the Defendant and G conspired with each other to provide entertainment drinking houses for entertainment purposes (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 93Do2080, Mar. 22, 1994; Supreme Court Decision 98Do1438, May 14, 199). On August 27, 2013, the first facts charged by the lower court, “the Defendant is the principal agent of “F” in Jung-gu, Seoul. G is the manager of the said business. A person carrying on the amusement business is not allowed to provide, arrange, or provide, obscene activities. A person carrying on the amusement business is not allowed to do so, and around 22:30, Aug. 29, 2012, the Defendant and G conspired with each other to have a female customer enter into an entertainment drinking house for entertainment purposes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Do1438, Aug. 14, 1999).