logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2014.04.09 2013고정3677
청소년보호법위반
Text

The Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the Defendants is published.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is a person who operates a mutually convenient store called Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Building 103, and Defendant A is a person who works as an employee at the above convenience store.

Defendant

A은, 청소년을 대상으로 청소년유해약물을 판매하여서는 아니됨에도 불구하고, 2013. 8. 1. 22:21경 청소년인 F(15세, 여)에게 나이를 확인하지 않고 청소년유해약물인 마일드세븐뫼비우스 담배 2갑, 레종아이스프레소 담배 1갑을 판매하였다.

Defendant

B, at the same time and place as above, Defendant A, an employee of Defendant B, sold harmful drugs to juveniles in relation to the Defendant B’s business.

2. As to the determination, the Defendants asserted that there was no intentional violation of the Juvenile Protection Act since Defendant A demanded the F to present an identification card with respect to the tobacco before the instant case, and the F at the time presented another person’s identification card that is an adult, and the F was known to be not a juvenile, and thus, Defendant A did not intend to commit a violation of the Juvenile Protection Act.

According to the Defendants’ respective legal statements, F’s statement in the second trial records, and CCTV photographic data (Investigation Records 7 pages), the fact that Defendant A sold tobacco to F without confirming the identity card on the day of the instant case is recognized.

However, at the police's convenience point, F did not check the identification card from the time when the first tobacco was purchased at the convenience point of the Defendants, and stated that it was not possible to purchase another person's tobacco, presenting another person's identification card at the convenience point, and that it was possible to purchase tobacco by presenting another person's identification card at the convenience point of the Defendants before the instant case, and stated that the Defendants were in this form and were infused with Defendant A.

In light of this F’s legal statement, Defendant A’s identification card.

arrow