2. The judgment appears to be against the Defendant’s mistake, and there is no criminal history exceeding the fine, and the Defendant has a significant benefit from the instant crime.

It is difficult to see as normal conditions favorable to the defendant.

However, in light of the fact that the crime of this case was committed by the defendant who made a false indication of the origin of fishery products, the nature of the crime is grave, that the period of selling fishery products is not shorter than the period of selling fishery products, and the sales amount is considerable, that the defendant has been punished by a fine on the grounds that the defendant falsely indicated the place of origin in around 2007, that there is no special circumstance or change in circumstances that may be newly considered in the sentencing after the sentence of the judgment of the court below, and that there are other various sentencing conditions that are shown in the records and arguments, such as the age, character and environment of the defendant, circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the punishment of the court below is

Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.