The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not engage in a singing practice room business but engaged in a music record or music video production business, but the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty is erroneous in misconception of facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (1.5 million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Article 2 subparag. 13 of the Music Industry Promotion Act provides that "sing room business refers to a business that provides customers with facilities, such as video or non-video reflector, which allow them to singing in line with the musical instruments without any musical instruments," and Article 2 subparag. 8 of the same Act provides that "singing a music record or music video production business means a business that plans, produces, or copies music records, music files, music video products, or music video files." Whether a business entity is a music record or music video production business under each of the above provisions shall be determined on the basis of the substance of the type of business, such as the type of business performed at the business, and what kind of principal interest arises from the cost of providing a service. If a business entity simply provides customers with a singing room at the request of customers, the principal interest of its business is limited to a singing room business that uses music practice facilities such as video reflector."

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, C (hereinafter "the business of this case") operated by the defendant is registered as an editing agent, sound records and video service business, but in fact five rooms in the business of the defendant.