logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.11.21 2019고정1992
식품위생법위반
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

However, the execution of the above fine for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendants are those who have operated general restaurants in the name of "D" on the Gangnam-gu Seoul and the 1st underground floor.

No general restaurant business operator shall be equipped with sound facilities and allow customers to dance.

Nevertheless, at around 00:03 on March 17, 2019, the Defendants allowed customers who drink alcoholic beverages to dance in an empty space, etc. with a large volume of music equipped with DJS, sound, and image facilities in the area of a business site of 324 square meters of the said business establishment.

As a result, Defendants conspired to comply with the rules of food service business operators.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. A written accusation;

1. E statements;

1. Management ledger of reports on food service business;

1. A copy of the certificate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on investigation reporting;

1. Article 97 subparagraph 6 of the Food Sanitation Act and Article 44 (1) 8 of the Enforcement Rule of the Food Sanitation Act, Article 57 and attached Table 17 of the Enforcement Rule of the Food Sanitation Act, which applies mutatis mutandis to the relevant criminal facts and the

7.See l. 7) Article 30 of the Criminal Act (Selection of Fine)

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended execution (in light of the control situation, etc., there is no evidence to deem that the Defendants regularly allowed dancing by customers, and the Defendants are currently going to suspend the execution of a fine in consideration of all the sentencing conditions, including the closure of main points and the fact that there is no risk of re-offending)

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

arrow