However, the above sentence shall be executed for two years from the date of the final judgment.

Defendant

A is the representative of the “F farm” in Permitted-si Population E, and Defendant B is the director in charge of the duties, such as stable management, etc. of the said farm.

1. The Defendants’ slaughter of co-offendered livestock should be done at the permitted workplace.

Nevertheless, from June 13, 2012 to February 1, 2013, the Defendants conspired to slaughter 64 mariths raised from the said farm for the purpose of sale at an unauthorized slaughterhouse, which was prepared in the said F farm, and by processing black salt with X-ray.

2. From June 13, 2012 to December 28, 2012, Defendant A engaged in livestock product processing business without permission by processing and selling EXE equivalent to KRW 100 million at the processing room within the aforementioned F farm, without obtaining permission from the competent authority.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant B’s legal statement

1. Statement made by witnesses G in the third protocol of trial;

1. The statements of witnesses H and I in the fourth trial records;

1. Each police statement made to J, G and H;

1. Application of the laws and subordinate statutes concerning black chlogram photographs;

1. Relevant Articles 45 (1) 1 and 7 (1) of the Livestock Products Sanitary Control Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Article 45 (1) 6 and Article 22 (1) of the Livestock Products Sanitary Control Act (a place of business operating a livestock processing business without permission), and Article 45 (1) 22 (1) of the Livestock Products Sanitary Control Act (a place of business operating a livestock processing business without permission), Defendant B who choose imprisonment: Articles 45 (1) 1 and 7 (1) of the Livestock Products Sanitary Control Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant A from among concurrent crimes: the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants on probation: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendant A: Determination on Defendant A’s assertion under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

1. The part of Defendant A, who slaughtered livestock at an unauthorized place of work, did not know that Defendant B was slaughtered at his own discretion at the F farm, and Defendant B did not know that the livestock was slaughtered without permission. The part of the charges is charged.