When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The defendant is a person who operates a general restaurant in the name of "C" in Pyeongtaek-si B.

A person who sells or provides agricultural and fishery products or the processed products thereof pursuant to the Act on Origin Labeling of Agricultural and Fishery Products shall not make a false indication of the place of origin or make an indication that may cause confusion with such indication.

Nevertheless, from September 10, 2018 to October 12, 2018, the Defendant purchased KRW 210,000 from E, a stock company located in Sungsung City D for ten times, and indicated the country of origin of kimchi in the indication board of origin in the business place for the same period, and indicated the country of origin of kimchi as “porting in the country,” and indicated 140 km among the purchased Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese Chinese

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Status of each seller's delivery of goods;

1. Status of business partners and goods compiled;

1. Application of investigation reports (verification of details of purchase of domestic culture-based kimchi)-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Articles 14 (1) and 6 (1) 1 of the Act on Origin Labeling of Agricultural and Fishery Products and the Selection of Punishment for Criminal Facts;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The period of time when the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is falsely indicated, the amount of time provided to customers, as well as the amount of time provided to them, the defendant's erroneous judgment is determined as ordered by comprehensively taking account of various sentencing conditions under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, which are shown in the records of this case, such as the defendant's criminal record, criminal relation, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means