The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) was unlawful since the lower court rejected the statements made by E, G, and F, consistent with consistent and consistent CCTV images in a restaurant, thereby misunderstanding the facts and acquitted the Defendant.

2. The lower court, on the grounds of each of the circumstances in its holding, determined that it is difficult to believe that the statements made by E, G, and F in the lower court court court and investigative agencies, which correspond to the facts charged in the instant case, that the Defendant or employee H knew or could have known that he/she was a juvenile, were selling alcohol without verifying his/her identification card, and that the remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize the guilty of the facts charged in the instant case and that there is no other evidence to

The following circumstances, which are admitted by each evidence of the lower judgment, stated to the effect that G did not conduct an identification card inspection at the investigative agency, but at the court of the lower court, “20:0,000, G did not conduct an identification card inspection at all.”

“F was a minor, but the date of birth from the People’s Republic of Korea was changed to the date of birth from the People’s Republic of Korea, while the F was a minor, could drink in the People’s Republic of Korea.

Not only inconsistent with the statements made by the statement, but also inconsistent with the F’s statement made by the F’s investigative agency that does not have any identification card inspection, and thus, the statement is not reliable; 2 cafeterias

In light of the CCTV image that it is difficult to see the fact that an employee did not conduct an identification card inspection because it is difficult to confirm whether an employee was an employee’s identification card inspection, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts alleged by the prosecutor.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.