Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.
If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.
Punishment of the crime
The Defendant is a person who operates food entertainment business under the trade name of “D” in Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si.
A person who sells or provides agricultural and fishery products or the processed products thereof after cooking shall not make a false indication of the place of origin or make an indication likely to cause confusion therewith.
Nevertheless, from June 29, 2016 to January 31, 2017, the Defendant: (a) purchased a total of 2,226 kilograms of Hungary and Germany’s swine scrapers from Hungary located in Hanam-si and from Hungary-gu to offer them for Gu use; and (b) purchased a total of 270 km of Chinese Chinese worship from around October 31, 2016 to around January 27, 2017 in the “G” located in Kimcheon-si; and (c) provided some of them to implied scams, etc., but, in the indication column of origin of the said restaurant, the Defendant indicated it as “scamation, domestic production, domestic products, kimchi, rice and domestic products,” and indicated it as “G 270 km”. < Amended by Act No. 14302, Jun. 29, 2016>
Accordingly, the defendant made a mark that could cause confusion about the country of origin.
Summary of Evidence
1. Partial statement of the defendant;
1. H's certificate;
1. Investigation report (verification of details on purchase of items in violation of origin (the details on the items in violation of origin)), investigation report (verification of details on purchase of domestic products with Korean products), investigation report (additional verification of details on purchase of items in violation of origin (the addition of items in swine and cattle), and investigation report (Compilation of details on purchase of items in violation of origin (the items in swine and cattle);
1. Evidence of violation of country of origin [1. As to the part of three overlappings as indicated in the judgment, the Defendant added a new camera that sold only domestic scambling, and failed to modify the country of origin labeling, which is merely an indication of origin, and it did not constitute a false indication of origin.
As alleged by the Defendant, if the Defendant added a new me Newcom and sold and provided it in the above restaurant even if the Mediet overlaps with a foreign country, the Defendant was attached to the above restaurant.