The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and improper sentencing);

A. In fact, the Defendant refused to sell alcoholic beverages to juveniles, received orders from N.I. who was a son, and brought alcoholic beverages only to I, and calculated both alcoholic beverages I. As such, the Defendant was merely selling alcoholic beverages to I, not selling alcoholic beverages to juveniles.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case erred by misapprehending the facts.

B. The lower court’s sentence against an unfair defendant in sentencing (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s duly adopted and investigated evidence regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant may recognize the fact that the Defendant sold alcohol to juvenile F, not I, to the juvenile F, etc.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below to the same purport is just and there is no error as alleged by the defendant.

1) In the court of the court below, H stated that “I ordered her galm, and the Defendant brought about her galm,” and F stated that “I was her own aware of who was ordered galm, but the Defendant was her own.”

In addition, both H, F, and G are “The defendant only confirmed whether he or she is an adult to G” in the court of original instance and did not confirm H, F.

I made a statement with the same purport as “I was not well aware.”

2) F and H agreed to bear half of the costs, and visited Defendant’s shop for drinking alcohol, and they had previously ordered the alcohol without presentation of identification card at Defendant’s shop.

Therefore, the contents of the statements made by the juveniles who directly ordered the alcohol rather than the defendant's assertion that I would know well, correspond to a more natural and common sense.

3) Even if the Defendant’s assertion was accepted, 1. At that time.