The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Although the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case even though it constitutes "the place where many people gather or frequent," the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On May 13, 2009, the Defendant: (a) around 23:05 on May 13, 2009, committed an act of disturbing drinking alcohol in the Daejeon Heavy District.

B. According to the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that the place of crime is Daejeon District, which cannot be deemed as the “place where multiple people gather or frequent,” and that the submitted evidence alone lacks to recognize the Defendant’s act of disturbing drinking.

C. However, some of the above judgment of the court below is difficult to accept for the following reasons.

1) Article 1 Subparag. 25 of the former Punishment of Minor Offenses Act (amended by Act No. 11401, Mar. 21, 2012) (amended by Act No. 11401, Mar. 21, 2012) ( such as a sound address disturbance, etc. is reasonable to regard “the place where many people gather or frequent, such as a public hall, theater, restaurant, etc., or a train, motor vehicle, ship, etc. with many people, etc., by very rough words or actions, such as a riot, motor vehicle, ship, etc., or a person who makes spirits without any justifiable reason under the influence of alcohol, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding 10,00 won, detention, or minor fine.” Since public hall, theater, or restaurant is opened to many and unspecified persons, it is reasonable to regard “the place where many people gather or frequent,” and in addition, in the case of a public office or a public institution with the same Act, it is not subject to the said provision.