농수산물의원산지표시에관한법률위반등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, although the Defendant did not intentionally commit each of the crimes of this case, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.
B. The punishment of the lower judgment that was unfair in sentencing (an amount of five million won) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court can sufficiently recognize that the Defendant had committed each of the instant crimes.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.
(1) The Defendant, in relation to violations of the Act on Origin Labeling of Agricultural and Fishery Products, was engaged in the business by using the Australian Soviet, so far as possible, and even though he/she told G to change his/her origin, he/she did not change his/her origin.
The offender also stated that he had F undergo an investigation in detail by adding to F the total tax price, size, time of selling the cafeteria of the instant restaurant, the price of the Australian MU, the price of the Australian MU, and the amount sold after being sealed, etc.
was stated.
② At his option, G used the cafeteria in the instant restaurant, that the Defendant had been fully aware of the fact that the Mere New Market should be written in Australia, and that the Defendant had been fully aware of it.
was stated.
③ At the second investigation conducted by the police, F was the actual owner of the restaurant in this case, and the Defendant was the employee of the police, and at the third investigation conducted by the police, the Defendant was required to pay a fine on behalf of the Defendant, even though the Defendant was the actual owner of the restaurant in this case.
was stated.
B. The instant crime of determining the illegality of sentencing is to require the Defendant to indicate the origin of Australia’s Bossan in the Republic of Korea, and to state F as the actual owner of the instant restaurant.