The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant was not used as a raw material of the ginseng product category, and the Defendant was also aware that it was used in a place other than the manufacture of ginseng product category. Thus, the lower court erred by misapprehending the scope of application of the Act and subordinate statutes, on the grounds that it cannot be deemed that the prosecutor’s non-taxation is exempted as it falls under the proviso of Article 17(1) of the Ginseng Business Act and Article 4 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.

2. The lower court determined that according to the proviso of Article 17(1) of the Ginseng Industry Act and Article 4 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, “where a manufacturer of a race of ginseng sells to a manufacturer of ginseng products with the origin, weight, manufacturer and the name of the manufacturer and seller indicated on the red ginseng, solarly, or white ginseng” may not undergo an inspection.

In this case, the defendant indicated his country of origin, weight and the name of manufacturer and seller in white ginseng, etc. and sold it to B Co., Ltd. to the manufacturer of ginseng products without undergoing an exceptional inspection under the above Acts and subordinate statutes, and the scope of application of the above provisions, the above exceptional provisions cannot be deemed to apply only when the kinds of ginseng sold by the manufacturer of ginseng and the kinds of ginseng products are the same as those of the ginseng products actually used as the raw material of the ginseng products.

Article 4 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides for the exception of inspection in cases where the manufacturer of ginseng varieties sells ginseng products to the manufacturer of ginseng products with a certain indication in light of the above circumstances known by the court below based on the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below. Thus, beyond the meaning of the text, requiring additional requirements in interpretation beyond the meaning of the text is ultimately not based on the law but rather on the legal basis.