The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of the misunderstanding of facts, D and E entered a restaurant, and laid tobacco out of the table, and therefore, the Defendant did not have any intention to commit a crime of violating the Juvenile Protection Act, since D and E had different knowledge about the reduction of juveniles and confirmed identification cards stored in mobile phones.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 500,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the contents and legislative purpose of the Juvenile Protection Act regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the owner or employee of a business establishment that sells drugs harmful to juveniles, such as alcoholic beverages, has a duty to take additional age verification measures, such as making the owner or employee of a business establishment who sells such drugs harmful to juveniles not sold to juveniles. In selling such drugs, barring any special circumstance where the purchaser objectively deemed that it is difficult for him/her to doubt as a juvenile, the purchaser should verify the age of the other party based on his/her resident registration certificate or other evidence of public probative value equivalent to that of the above, unless there are circumstances that make it difficult for him/her to doubt as a juvenile. If there is a doubt that the photograph and actual substance on the resident registration certificate presented by the eligible person are different, the case where the juvenile requests the purchase of alcoholic beverages harmful to juveniles using his/her identity and age at least a large number of cases, and barring any special circumstance, it is acknowledged that the court below duly admitted the aforementioned legal principle to the owner or employee of the business to violate the above Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 20038Do138.