logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2019.09.26 2019노717
청소년보호법위반
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) did not consider D as a juvenile at all, and there was no intention to commit a crime of violating the Juvenile Protection Act against the defendant.

2. Determination

A. The former Juvenile Protection Act (amended by Act No. 15913, Dec. 11, 2018) prohibits a juvenile from selling harmful drugs, such as alcoholic beverages, etc., and imposes an obligation on a person who intends to sell harmful drugs, etc., to verify the other party’s age.

(Article 28(1) and (3). Unless there are any circumstances objectively deemed difficult to suspect the access person as a juvenile, the age of the person subject to the access person shall be confirmed by resident registration certificates or other evidence of public probative value of age to the same degree as that of his/her age, unless there are any circumstances.

If a business owner or employee did not take any measures to verify age in violation of the duty to verify age, barring special circumstances, the owner or employee may be deemed to have dolusent intent to commit a violation of the Juvenile Protection Act due to a violation of the said Act (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do3713, Jul. 27, 2006).

Judgment

According to the evidence adopted and examined by the court below, considering the following facts and circumstances, the defendant can be found to have had the intention to sell alcoholic beverages to juveniles who do not have any negligence in light of the above legal principles.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

1) According to the relevant legal principles, it is reasonable to view that the convenience store operator has a duty to verify the age of the person who entered the age group where the person who entered the age group, even if the youth is highly probable, intends to purchase harmful drugs, such as alcoholic beverages. 2) D who purchased alcoholic beverages at the convenience store of this case was a student who was enrolled in the third year in the middle school at the time of purchase of alcoholic beverages as the student in 203.

3 D's biological age and CCTV.

arrow