2. Determination:

A. We examine the judgment on Defendant A, although it is deemed that the defendant had the same career three times for the defendant, and that the defendant committed the crime of this case during the period of suspension of execution of the same crime, or during the period of suspension of execution of the crime of this case, etc., the defendant is deemed to have a bad character of the crime of this case through confinement life for about two months at the court below, there are circumstances to consider that the defendant has no past record, and that the defendant continued to commit the crime of this case to maintain his livelihood, and there is no specific risk in food sanitation due to the crime of this case, and it seems that there is no specific risk in food sanitation due to the crime of this case, and all other matters concerning the sentencing specified in the records and arguments of this case, including the age, occupation, character and conduct of the defendant, environment, etc., are considered to have been appropriate. Thus, the prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

B. We examine the judgment on Defendant B, even though the Defendant had the record of violating the Food Sanitation Act, there is no criminal record exceeding the fine, and the period of the instant crime is relatively long, and the Defendant has not committed the instant crime in depth and is likely to not repeat again. In full view of all other matters concerning the sentencing specified in the records and arguments of the instant crime, including the background of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, occupation, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the instant crime, the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit, since the judgment of the court below against the said Defendant is also reasonable.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since it is without merit.