A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who operates a real estate brokerage office in the name of the head of the Dongcheon City, which is a person who sells tobacco in the name of the head of the Dong in the same place.

No one shall sell, lend, distribute, or provide to juveniles drugs harmful to juveniles free of charge.

Nevertheless, around 17:00 on June 3, 2014, the Defendant did not verify the age of the juvenile E (the age of 15) from the above D real estate by examining identification cards, and sold one cigarette, which is a drug harmful to juveniles, without verifying the age.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Statement E in the second protocol of interrogation of the suspect against the accused at the police;

1. E statements;

1. Reporting on detection of businesses violating the Juvenile Protection Act;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a copy of a letter of designation as retailer or a copy of resident registration;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 59 subparagraph 6 and 28 (1) of the Juvenile Protection Act which choose a penalty;

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

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the Defendant and his defense counsel sold tobacco twice prior to the issuance of the provisional payment order under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and that they sold tobacco without verification of identification card, on the ground that they were not minors because they confirmed their resident registration certificates by selling tobacco twice prior to the Defendant against E.

In light of the objective circumstances or the attitude of the E when it makes a statement in the court, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant, as stated in the judgment, was aware that, at least, the E was a juvenile at the time of selling tobacco to E, as if it were stated in the judgment.

Therefore, the defendant and defense counsel's arguments are not accepted.

The defendant's reason for sentencing is against the juvenile.