The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant’s business of mistake of facts is not a singing practice room business, but a music record and music video production business. The Defendant did not sell alcoholic beverages, but only purchased alcoholic beverages at the customer’s request, and the Defendant did not engage in a singing practice room business without registration, and the Defendant did not provide alcoholic beverages to customers as a singing practice room business operator.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence of the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the "D" operated by the defendant is registered as a business operator for video records and editing agency service business. However, the actual contents of the business are eight rooms within the place of business with the equipment, such as video reflectors and microphones, so that customers can sing in the line with the musical instruments without the musical instruments. At the time of the crackdown on this case, customers were being engaged in beer and singing, and the defendant provided customers with singing together with the musical instruments. In light of the above facts, the defendant's business constitutes a singing practice room business, and the defendant was obviously aware that the defendant provided alcoholic beverages to the singing practice room customers he operated. Thus, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. In light of the fact that the Defendant again committed the instant crime even though having the same kind of power on several occasions, and that the investigative agency consistently denies the instant crime from the criminal investigation agency to the trial, and that the circumstances constituting the conditions for sentencing as stated in the instant case, such as the Defendant’s character, conduct, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, etc., are equally taken into account, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed to be too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit and it is in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.