Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a general restaurant operator.

No general food service provider shall have a entertainment entertainment entertainment service provider provide entertainment services by employing entertainment service providers, or encourage or implied such activities of employees.

On January 24, 2017, around 22:00, the Defendant employed two female employees, etc. in the Dacin located in Cheongju-gu, Seo-gu, Seowon-si B, and 2 female employees violated the obligation of business operators by providing entertainment services in general restaurants, such as accepting beer with beer D and drinking with beer, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. According to the protocol of interrogation of suspects of the police and the protocol of police statement of D (the service of a summons of a witness to D of this court, the results of service of a summons of the witness to D of this court, and the statement of a request for detection of the location, etc., it is recognized that D constitutes “when a person who is required to make a statement at a preparatory hearing or a public trial is unable to make a statement because his/her whereabouts are unknown or for any other reasons corresponding thereto,” as prescribed by

In addition, the statements of D are specific and consistent with D as to the circumstances surrounding D's above carpet, relation with D's drinking with it, status in the above carpet, other than the above E's grounds for determining D's remaining women who drink with themselves as employees of the above carpet. D's statement continued to maintain D's statement even though it was a situation where women who sit in company with D's female-gu interest to reverse D's statement that they are not employees, as argued by the defendant, and the defendant had maintained D's statement. The above E's statement had tried the defendant's work and got in the above carpet at the defendant's request. F's statement that D's female-gu interest was stated as female-gu female-gu employee of the above carpet on the same day, Eul and Eul were drinking together with E in the above carpet, and it was argued that D's above investigation agency's above investigation agency's allegation to the purport that it was identical to the above assertion.