The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (In fact-finding assertion) is as follows: (a) the Defendant inspected identification card of the instant restaurant (hereinafter “instant main shop”) on the date and time indicated in the facts charged of the instant case and confirmed that he was an adult and entered the main points of the instant case; and (b) there was no criminal intent as to selling drugs harmful to juveniles to E, a juvenile.

2. In light of the legislative intent of the Juvenile Protection Act, since the employers and employees of establishments banned from allowing juveniles to enter such establishments are highly strict and responsible for not allowing them to enter such establishments for the protection of juveniles. Thus, the employers and employees of establishments banned from allowing juveniles to enter and leave establishments must verify the age of juveniles based on resident registration certificates or evidence with public probative value of age to the age group that is likely to be juveniles objectively, unless there are any circumstances that make it difficult to doubt the visitors as juveniles, and if juveniles enter such establishments due to their failure to take any measures to confirm their age in violation of the duty to verify their age, barring any special circumstances, the employers and employees do not have any negligence in violation of the Juvenile Protection Act due to the violation of the above legal provisions (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do8039, Apr. 23, 2004). The court below lawfully admitted and investigated evidence that the Defendants did not have any identification card in this case from the following circumstances, i.e., the Defendants did not have any identification card in this case.