The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

The defendant does not pay the above fine.

1. The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the facts charged of this case on the ground that there is no proof of crime, is erroneous in the misapprehension of the facts and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment, although the defendant acknowledged that he provided alcoholic beverages to customers and arranged for a loan of entertainment as a singing practice room business operator as stated in

2. Summary of the facts charged in this case and the judgment of the court below

A. The gist of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a singing practice hall operator who operates a singing practice hall with the trade name called D’s singing practice hall in Daegu Northern-gu C.

A singing practice room business operator shall not sell or provide alcoholic beverages, and he/she shall not employ or arrange a entertainment loan that provides entertainment services. However, from March 5, 2015 to around 01:10 on the same day, from March 5, 2015, he/she provided to customers E, such as beer and task, etc., and arranged one person under a name-free entertainment loan to encourage customers.

B. The lower court determined that the E’s statement is not reliable in light of the E’s legal statement, and the remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to have proven the facts charged without reasonable doubt.

On the grounds that it cannot be seen, the facts charged of this case were acquitted.

3. According to each description of the Defendant’s statement and text of the judgment at the trial court at the trial court at the trial court at the time of the decision of the political party (2016 order 4045, 4774) and each description of the Defendant’s copy of the investigation protocol at the prosecutor’s office at the time of September 26, 2016 against the Defendant, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant, a singing practice hall operator, provided alcoholic beverages and arranged for a loan as stated in the instant facts charged.

Nevertheless, the court below acquitted the charged facts of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

The prosecutor's argument pointing this out is with merit.

4. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is reasonable, and it is in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.