2. The lower court, based on the circumstances that the Defendant sold the health functional foods in question for a long time, and the sales amount is disadvantageous to a large amount, taking into account the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s primary offender was involved in the domestic delivery of the product; and (b) the degree of participation is relatively minor; and (c) determined a sentence by taking into account the Defendant’s age, sex, family relationship, family environment, motive and means of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime

As above, the Defendant took part in the illegal sale of a large quantity of health functional foods for a long time and received a large amount of income, and even if such crime is highly likely to harm national health, the above sentencing conditions have been changed in the court at the same time.

There is no reason to view the foregoing sentencing, and in light of the foregoing, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed as unfair because it is too unreasonable to view it as a whole.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.