Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The owner of a business establishment prohibited from access by juveniles shall verify the age of persons who have access to the business establishment and shall not allow juveniles to access the business establishment.

The Defendant is a person who runs an entertainment drinking house business under the trade name of “C” in Gwangju-gu.

On 17, 2019. 00:40 on 17, 2019, the Defendant entered the above entertainment drinking house, which is a business establishment prohibited from having access to juveniles, without verifying the age of juvenile D(16).

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. A protocol concerning the police interrogation of the accused;

1. The written statement of the defendant;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning D police statements;

1. Article 59 applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 59 subparagraph 8 of the Juvenile Protection Act and Article 29 (2) of the same Act (Selection of Fine);

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. On the grounds delineated below the gist of the assertion, the defendant did not have an intention to allow the juvenile to enter an entertainment drinking house.

(1) At the time of the instant case, the Defendant demanded D to produce an identification card, and D had been on a wall and did not present an identification card.

At that time, the defendant, on the other customer's ground, received another customer without finishing the verification procedure of identification card on D, and thereafter presented the identification card to other adult, and at the time it was confirmed as D's identification card.

(2) Even before the occurrence of the instant case, D had been in the entertainment tavern operated by the Defendant, and even at the time D had presented an identification card to another adult, the Defendant was aware that D was an adult prior to the instant occurrence.

2. On the grounds delineated below, the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion is without merit.

As to the assertion that the defendant confirmed the identification card presented by D at the time of the instant case, the defendant allowed D to enter the same on the day of the instant case after being aware of it as a minor.