The judgment below

The part against the Defendants is reversed.

Defendant

A and D shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year, and by Defendant J.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment of Defendant A and D (unfair sentencing) sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months, and Defendant D: imprisonment with prison labor for one year and three months) are too unreasonable.

B. Defendant J 1) attempted to have an entertainment in the “AP Singing Practice Place” operated by the Defendant by the Defendant, a juvenile misunderstanding the facts, but the customers did not refuse the AJ and did not have an entertainment. The Defendant did not pay a price to the AJ.

Nevertheless, the court below rendered a guilty verdict against the defendant, and the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 80 hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. An ex officio decision-making prosecutor filed an application for changes in the indictment with regard to the change of the “AP AP Sing practice place” among the facts charged against Defendant J to the “AP Sing practice place,” and the subject of the judgment was changed by this court upon permission.

Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below against the defendant J among this point is no longer maintained.

However, there is reason to reverse ex officio as above.

The defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court within the scope related to the revised facts charged, and this is examined below.

In addition, with regard to the violation of the Juvenile Protection Act against Defendant J, the prosecutor applied the applicable law to Defendant J as “Article 59 subparag. 8 and Article 29 subparag. 2 of the former Juvenile Protection Act (Act No. 12534),” and applied for the amendment of a bill of amendment with regard to the addition and modification as stated in the facts charged in the following preliminary charges, and the court permitted the amendment, thereby changing the subject of the judgment.

The defendant is a person who operates a PP sing practice hall in Seo-gu, Daejeon and the third floor.

The Defendant on May 16, 2015.