The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The Defendant, by misapprehending the legal principles, sold a singing in D, and sold the beer, but there is no marking of the beer, and D does not constitute “a sran tavern” under the Food Sanitation Act.

The punishment (fine 1,00,000) sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Article 37 (1) of the Food Sanitation Act provides that a person who intends to engage in a business prescribed by Presidential Decree among the businesses provided for in Article 36 (1) shall obtain permission from the competent authorities, and Article 23 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that an entertainment bar business shall be one of the businesses subject to permission.

On the other hand, Article 21 of the Enforcement Decree of the Food Sanitation Act, which embodys the business of Article 36 (1) of the same Act, provides that "a business of cooking and selling alcoholic beverages mainly, and customers are allowed to singing."

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, it is acknowledged that the defendant installed a facility that enables customers to sing, and allowed customers to sing to sing, and sold the beer to customers if they want to sing. Thus, even if there is no fact of selling beer as alleged by the defendant, it is not doubtful that the above D constitutes sing bar business under Article 21 of the Enforcement Decree of the Food Sanitation Act, even if it does not exist as alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of legal principles is without merit.

The punishment of KRW 1,00,00, which the court below sentenced to the defendant on the argument of unfair sentencing, is not deemed to be unfair because it is too unreasonable in light of the equity in sentencing with other similar cases, and other various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing specified in the arguments and records of this case.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

In conclusion, the defendant .