beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as shown in the facts charged, and the defendant did not arrange for a entertainment loan by allowing E to singing in a singing practice room, and the customer I was a woman he knows, and the defendant provided sings to sing in three rooms while the defendant knew that he was a customer, and provided sings to singing in three rooms, but the judgment below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.
2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, ① the Defendant operated the D Singing Practice Center on the Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Branch (hereinafter “instant Sing Practice Center”) and ② the police sent to the instant Sing Practice Center around September 29, 2014 on the date of the instant report, upon receiving the 112 report, and on September 29, 2014, the Defendant was arrested by the police while he escaped from the three units of the instant Sing Practice Center, and was arrested by the police. The Defendant was arrested by the three units of the instant Sing Practice Center (F, I, and K) in the three units of the instant Sing Practice Center; ③ in the investigative agency and the court of the court of the court below, by reporting the advertisement that the Defendant was going to the sing Practice Center and receiving KRW 25,00,000 as the sing Practice Center and notified the Defendant of the instant case.
At that place, three male and three females (including E) were located, but two females, who entered the instant singing practice place for the purpose of controlling the police, went out of the instant singing practice place, and they also went to themselves.
‘The facts stated in the Defendant’ (13 pages of evidence, 59, 65 pages of the trial record), and 4. The facts charged by the Defendant constitute a crime of the same kind as the facts charged. According to the above facts, there is doubt that the Defendant provided the customers of the instant singing practice room with singing and arrange for a loan by providing them with singing-free.
However, the following circumstances are acknowledged based on the aforementioned evidence.