2. The defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year and five months;

The details of seized sales shall be recorded.

A. It is reasonable to view that the Defendants posted promotional materials containing the efficacy of melting at a place where many unspecified elderly people gather, put them into a melting container, and put them into a melting container, which is a melting tool in the food package box sold to senior citizens, and the case where the Defendants falsely or exaggerated advertisement on the container and package "containers, etc." as prescribed by the Food Sanitation Act is applicable under different premise. However, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendants of this part of the facts charged against the Defendants on different premise is erroneous, or by misapprehending the legal principles on "False or exaggerated advertisement" under the Food Sanitation Act, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Considering that Defendants A and B (the Defendants were aware of the facts of the instant crime, and they were committed in depth as a means to maintain their livelihood, and there were circumstances that could be considered in the process of the instant crime. The instant X-ray included herb drugs, including melting excluding melting, and thus, has certain efficacy. The Defendants cannot be deemed as profits from the total amount acquired through disbursement of considerable expenses in the process of selling X-ray. The victims are not punished against the Defendants; the victims are also making efforts to reach an agreement with the victims in good faith; while most names and contact numbers of victims are not known, the lower court’s punishment (A: imprisonment with prison labor for one year and eight months, confiscation, Defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for one year and one year and one year) is too unfair.

2. Before making ex officio judgments and judgment on the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor and the defendant A and B, the examination is conducted ex officio.