A. In full view of the fact-misunderstanding (as to the violation of the Toxic Chemicals Control Act due to the running of the business of selling unregistered poisonous substances), Defendant A engaged in the business of selling poisonous substances, taking into account the scale of Arabicum imported by Defendant A, the facilities, human resources, and business contents of Defendant B, etc.

It is reasonable to view it.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (for the Defendants, KRW 2.5 million per each of the fines) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the grounds as stated in its holding, and the Prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

B. In light of the various circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing as indicated in the records, such as Defendant A’s age, sexual conduct, environment, background leading to the import of the instant poisonous substance, and the size, frequency, period, and mode of the import of unreported poisonous substances, as to the wrongful assertion of sentencing, the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unfair, and thus, the Prosecutor’s improper assertion of sentencing is without merit.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.