식품위생법위반
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the defendant operated the restaurant of this case jointly with C according to the summary of the grounds for appeal
The judgment of the court below which acquitted the primary facts charged even though it is sufficient to recognize it, is erroneous in the misconception of facts.
2. A person who intends to engage in general restaurant business under the main facts charged shall report to the Special Self-Governing City Mayor, a branch office of a Special Self-Governing Province or the head of a Si/Gun
However, in the building owned by the Defendant in Jung-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, the Defendant and C conspired to conduct a general restaurant business without “general restaurant business report” to the head of Jung-gu Incheon Metropolitan Government, and the Defendant offered to C a new bank account (G) in the name of the Defendant, which is deposited in the card sales amount generated from the above general restaurant business with the above building on March 25, 2015. From the time when C received the account in the above building and the Defendant’s name until May 28, 2016, C was equipped with a cooking organization in the above building and divided the profits therefrom into a general restaurant business that prepares and sells lighting and blades in an average amount of KRW 200,000 per day to unspecified customers.
As a result, the defendant and C engaged in general restaurant business without reporting to the competent authorities.
3. Determination
A. The lower court held that H appeared as a witness of the lower court in 2012 and stated the Defendant’s sales of the instant restaurant in Noart on around May 1, 2016, and the Defendant, at the time of reporting around May 2016, stated to the effect that he used the restaurant in this case, she was seated in the restaurant, she was seated in the restaurant, and ice was also the same. According to the summary order issued by the Incheon District Court 2002 High Court 2002 High Court 48981 High Court 201 High Court 201, and the Non-prosecution decision issued by the Incheon District Prosecutor’s Office 2016 High Court 201. The Defendant did not report from June 1, 2002 to September 19, 2002.