The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to the gist of the grounds for appeal, although the defendant or his employee did not properly verify the identification card of E and F, which is a juvenile, and even if the above E and F were sufficiently recognized that they sold alcohol while recognizing that they were juvenile, the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts.

2. Determination

A. On December 23, 2017, around 21:30 on December 23, 2017, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case: (a) the Defendant sold to the D main restaurant operated by the Defendant in G, for juvenile E (V, 17 years of age), and F (V, 17 years of age) 2 parallel liquor 12,00 won, which is a juvenile harmful drug.

B. The court below's decision based on the following circumstances, i.e., the E/F, a juvenile of the age of 17, entered and ordered a restaurant operated by the defendant with seven adults; the end of the year and the end of the day of the week; the defendant and his/her employees were very poor; ② CCTV images show the identification card against the defendant's employees, including E and F, respectively; ③ At the time, E shows another person's identification card; ④ At the time of verifying the identification card, F shows another person's identification card stored in the cell phone; ④ At the time of verifying the identification card; ④ At the time of confirming the identification card, E/F was unable to see the face of the employee; ⑤ endeavored to belong to the employee, such as getting off time while acting as if he/she had found the identification card; ⑤ On the day of the day of the instant case; and ② on the day, in light of F's photograph, the evidence presented by the prosecutor is insufficient to recognize that it is insufficient for the defendant to know that it is a juvenile.