All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. On June 14, 2019, Defendant B was dissatisfied with the judgment of the court below and filed an appeal, and on June 25, 2019, Defendant B received the notification of the receipt of the trial record from this court on June 25, 2019 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 9Mo25, Feb. 14, 2000) and served as a lawful supplementary service (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 9Mo25, Feb. 14, 2000)], Defendant B did not submit the statement of grounds of appeal within the submission period for the statement of grounds of appeal under Article 361-3(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the petition of appeal does not contain the grounds for appeal, and no ex officio investigation on

Meanwhile, Defendant B’s assertion that the surcharge was calculated unfairly on August 19, 2019 when submitting the statement of grounds for appeal on August 19, 2019, and that the sentence of the court below is too heavy. However, this is not a legitimate reason for appeal since it was submitted after the deadline for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal. Even if examining this part ex officio, it is difficult to deem that the surcharge imposed on Defendant B was calculated unfairly or the sentencing of the court below is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the appeal by the defendant B should be dismissed by decision, but as long as the appeal by the defendant A and C is ruled as follows, a separate dismissal decision shall not be made and a judgment shall be rendered together with the judgment.

2. Determination on Defendant A and C’s appeal

A. The summary of the grounds of appeal 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (Defendant A) merely operated the E and F entertainment tavern only until January 2019, Defendant A and Defendant A did not run the E and F entertainment tavern from February 2019. The average customer per day during the period in which Defendant A independently operated the E entertainment tavern was five persons. While running the entertainment tavern, Defendant A was 40,000 won (i.e., 30,000 won per son - 210,000 won per son - 210,000 won paid to female visitors.