beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.10.13 2016노1519

식품위생법위반등

Text

The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Reasons

The court below found the victim C not guilty of each fraud among the facts charged in the instant case (2015 highest 7780), and found the Defendant guilty of the violation of the Food Sanitation Act, fraud, Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act, and the violation of the Door-to-Door Sales Act, etc. (2015 highest 7088), and only the Defendant appealed against the guilty part of the judgment below.

Therefore, since the non-guilty part of the judgment of the court below is separated and confirmed after the lapse of the appeal period, the scope of the judgment is limited to the conviction part

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

In the case of a crime of violating the Food Sanitation Act among the facts charged in the case of mistake of facts, the defendant did not use the advertisement leaflet containing an advertisement that contains an advertisement that is likely to have efficacy or effect in preventing and treating diseases, or to mislead or confuse it as medicine or health functional foods.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, and the court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

Of the crimes of violating the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act in the instant facts charged, the Defendant misunderstood that the Defendant was authorized by R Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “R”) to use R’s mark and used R’s mark in the event of special events. The Defendant did not intend to commit a crime of violating the Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, and the court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

The sentence of imprisonment (three years of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's ex officio, the records show that the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor in the Seoul Northern District Court on July 3, 2015 and two years and six months.