From August 27, 2014 to July 25, 2016, the Defendant falsely marked the origin to G general restaurants operated by F from “E meat shop” in the operation of the Defendant in Busan High-gu, Busan High-gu, by attaching a marking label indicating the origin of the imported swine 1,656kg in the Republic of Korea, and sold KRW 23,184,00,00, from January 27, 2014 to November 2, 2016, the Defendant falsely marked or sold the origin of the Republic of Korea a total of KRW 240,878,965, such as the list of crimes in the attached Form, from January 27 to November 2, 2016.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to H and I;

1. Three copies of the written statement;

1. The notice of the result of origin assessment, a copy of the verification of non-disclosure of origin, the details of sales for each item of the J-cafeteria Pats Pats Pats Pats Pats Pats Pats Pats, the details of purchase, the details of the purchase, a copy of the Fatch Director of the

1. Each investigation report (time 12, 13, 14, 20, 23, 26, 30, 31, 36, 38, 39, 48, 52, 60, 69, 74, 76);

1. The application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the scene photographs of each violation, imported swine photography photographs of a fat, the origin of which is displayed, and the application of statutes on the site photographs;

1. Relevant Article 14 and Article 6 (1) 1 of the Act on Origin Labeling of Agricultural and Fishery Products and the Selection of Imprisonment with labor for the crime;

1. The reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act for the aggravation of concurrent crimes [the scope of recommendations] [the reasons for sentencing under Article 38(1)2, Article 50 [the scope of recommendations] : The basic area (from June 20 to two years): No one step increase [the person who is subject to special sentencing] as a result of combined crimes of the same kind. [the decision of sentencing] Such crimes need to be strictly punished on the grounds that social harm, such as infringing upon the right food option and trust of consumers and impairing sound distribution order, is large.

Although the defendant recognizes all crimes, the defendant is against himself, the defendant is close to three years.