The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding) G’s written statement prepared by the judicial police officer and the protocol of examination of suspect interrogation protocol, and each of the above evidence and H’s statements, etc., the judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendant, even if the charges of this case are found guilty, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and thereby affecting the conclusion

2. The summary of the facts charged is as follows.

3. The lower court determined that: (a) it is difficult to recognize that the police interrogation protocol and the protocol of police testimony of G, which correspond to the facts charged in the instant case, were made under a particularly reliable condition as stipulated in Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act; (b) H, although the investigation agency and the court of the lower court, it is not possible to find who had been fright despite the fact that they had been frighten; (c) it is not known that they had been frighten; (d) even if they had been frighten, it cannot be confirmed whether they had been frighten, and even according to the details of card use or on-site photographs, it cannot be confirmed whether they had been provided with beer and frighten; and (e) the said evidence alone is insufficient to recognize the facts charged in the instant case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this, and thus, found the Defendant not guilty on

4. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the trial court: (i) the witness G of the party (a) consistently sought the instant singing room from the investigative agency to the trial of the party; and (b) requested the Defendant to order the beer and provide a contact loan; (c) the Defendant drank in the instant singing room; and (d) the Defendant was in dispute with the entertainment loan that took place together with the entertainment loan.