However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The Defendant is a person who sells livestock products under the trade name “C” in Daegu Northern-gu B.

No one shall make a false indication of the place of origin of agricultural and fishery products or make an indication that may cause confusion with it.

From March 2018 to October 7, 2019, the Defendant purchased 631.18km of foreign beef from D located in Seocho-gu in Seoul, and indicated the origin as “domestic acid” when selling 7,500 won per 100gs (total amount of KRW 47,338,500) of the said foreign beef, and purchased 2,624.7kg from D for the same period, and then sold 1,450 won per 100g (total amount of KRW 19,024,00) of the said foreign beef.

Accordingly, the defendant made a false indication of the origin of agricultural and fishery products.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Business registration certificate copy;

1. Each report on internal investigation:

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. Relevant Article 14 (1) and Article 6 (1) 1 of the Act on Origin Labeling of Agricultural and Fishery Products (Concurrent Imposition of Imprisonment with prison labor and fines) concerning facts constituting an offense and the choice of punishment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for one to seven years, and a fine of 50,00 won to one hundred million won; and

2. Scope of recommendations (decision of types of imprisonment) according to the sentencing guidelines (decision of types of imprisonment), false labelling [Type 2] and no general type [the scope of recommendations and recommendations] [the scope of recommendations] basic field, imprisonment with labor for ten months through two years;

3. The fact that the Defendant, who was sentenced to the sentence, made a false indication of the origin of agricultural and fishery products, did not have sold the products, considering the importance of the legal interests infringed upon by the instant crime, and the fact that the Defendant has led to the crime is the same.