logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.06.08 2017고정482
청소년보호법위반
Text

The sentence against the accused shall be determined by a fine of KRW 3,00,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who operates a general restaurant in the name of “D” in Gwangju City Mining District C.

1. A general restaurant operated by the defendant who employs a juvenile harmful business establishment is a juvenile harmful business establishment mainly engaged in cooking and selling alcoholic beverages, so the juvenile shall not be employed.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, from around 17:00 on September 27, 2016 to around 00:00 on December 29, 2016, at the main point of “D”, employed juvenile E (17 tax) as an employee of KRW 6,030 per hour, and had customers ice alcohol and alcohol.

2. Around December 31, 2016, the Defendant sold liquor liquor to KRW 83,800,000 per week 5 bottles, beer 2 bottles, and beer 2 bottles without verifying identification cards from the main points of “D” to three juveniles, including E (17 taxes).

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of suspects of E;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Each written confirmation of G, H and I;

1. A certificate of business report;

1. Photographs of a photograph by capturing a Kakao transmission content and by capturing a settlement of alcoholic beverage payments;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (Attachment to the detailed statement of transactions from entering and withdrawing money and verification of the counter party thereto);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 58 subparagraph 4, 29 (1) (the occupation of a business establishment harmful to juveniles) of the Protection of Juveniles Act, Article 59 subparagraph 6, and Article 28 (1) of the Protection of Juveniles Act (the occupation of a business establishment harmful to juveniles) of the Protection of Juveniles Act, and the selection of fines, respectively;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The alleged Defendant did not sell alcoholic beverages to E, and he was an adult while working for E, and H and I were adults, and around January 1, 2017, around 00:08, at the time when the alcohol value was approved, the Defendant was an adult under the Act on the Protection of Youth, and thus does not constitute the elements of composition.

2. Determination.

arrow