The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant, a misunderstanding of fact, sold a non- alcohol beverage called “nit liquor” rather than beer, the Defendant committed an unlawful act that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the fact that the first instance judgment was erroneous.

B. In light of the fact that there is no criminal history of the same kind of crime and it is difficult for the defendant to be a general recipient under the National Basic Living Security Act, the fine of KRW 700,000 sentenced by the first instance court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly examined and adopted by the first instance court on the assertion of mistake of facts, the following facts can be acknowledged: (a) at the time of the instant case, the first instance court: (b) 2 of the four plastic remaining in the singing room 2 of the Defendant’s operation at the time of the instant case, and the remainder 2 of the two were made in the alcohol smell; (c) there were considerable differences between the drinking alcohol and the drinking alcohol, including alcohol; and (d) F, the control police officer, at the time of singing, prepared a control report (the 11th page of the investigation record) to the effect that the Defendant, who is a practice master, provided the drinking alcohol to the customers (the credibility of the legal statement or control report merely because F, contrary to the Defendant’s assertion, was a police officer). In light of the above acknowledged facts, the Defendant sold the beer at the time of the instant case.

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just and there is an error of law by mistake of facts.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. The Defendant’s judgment on the wrongful assertion of sentencing is not enough to repent of the fact that he denies the crime without breaking his mistake.

In addition to the fact that the defendant seems to be seen, it is examined in detail the various circumstances that constitute the conditions for sentencing, such as the age, sexual conduct, environment, the background of the crime in this case, and the circumstances after the crime.