Residential Busan Guide-gu

Original domicile Busan Northern-gu

2. Kim○-○ and distribution business;

Residence Busan East-gu

Original domicile Busan Northern-gu

Law Firm L&WK, Attorneys Park Gyeong-chul (Defendant Kim ○○)

Defendants are siblings. From June 2010 to October 201, 201, Defendant Kim○ operated the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, a type of meat store, from around June 201 to around October 24, 201. From around December 201, Defendant Kim○○○ operated the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, a type of Kim○○○○○○○○○○○○○, a meat store, and operated the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, a type of meat store directly leased from around May 201 to around July 2012.

No person shall make a false indication of the place of origin of agricultural and fishery products or make a false indication of the place of origin of agricultural and fishery products likely to cause confusion, and shall sell them under a disguised manner of origin, or display or keep them for the purpose of sale

Nevertheless, from August 5, 2010 to February 201, 201, the Defendants conspired and expressed as if it were a domestic acid the Chile-based swine scrap machine purchased from ○○○○-dong meat store to ○○○○○○ Livestock, etc., mixed with the domestic acid, and sold 4,453.17km in total of 31,312,01 won for 121,301.

From August 5, 2010 to July 17, 2012, the Defendants conspired with each other as indicated in the list of offenses, or sold or displayed and stored each of the imported swine machine as if it were a domestic product.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Each field photography and a statement of the details of detection (Evidence No. 3, 4, 6, 7 No. 3, 4, 6, and 7 submitted for inspection);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, including investigation reports and accompanying documents (Evidence 8 to 14, 43 to 48, 50 to 67, 69 to 76, 80 to 91, as evidence submitted by the prosecutor)

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Defendants: Articles 14 and 6(1)1 of the Act on Origin Labeling of respective Agricultural and Fishery Products; Article 30 of the Criminal Act (Defendant Kim ○ shall include Articles 1, 1, 2, 3 and 5 of the Criminal List)

1. Selection of punishment;

Defendants: Imprisonment Decision

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

Defendants: former part of Article 37, Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act

Reasons for both punishment

[ normal conditions favorable to the Defendants]

The fact that the Defendants led to a confession and reflect on the fact of crime.

The defendants reflect their mistakes and contributed 30 million won to society.

○ The Defendants have to support the young children.

○ Defendant Kim ○ is a primary offender, and Defendant Kim ○ does not have any criminal record of a stay of execution or more.

【Unfavorable Conditions unfavorable to the Defendants】

○ The crime of violating the Food Sanitation Act, like the instant case, infringes on consumers’ trust in agricultural and fishery products and their distribution process, infringes on consumers’ right to select products, and infringes on consumers’ right to select products, and causes injury to a good domestic livestock farm, and thus, the Defendants, which cannot be punished strictly, acquire unfair economic benefits from many unspecified consumers through the instant crime.

○ The duration of the crime or the amount of sales is also significant.

Defendant Kim○-○ also operated a meat store separate from Defendant Kim○-○ and committed a crime.

In light of the aforementioned circumstances and the motive, means, and results of the crime, the punishment as set forth in the disposition shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendants’ age, environment, criminal records, family relations, and circumstances after the crime; and (b) Defendant Kim○, who is a punishment, is detained by the Defendant Kim○, is not subject to detention.