1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. Defendant A and B shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and Defendant C, D, E, and G, for a year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendants’ misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal principles 1) The lower court’s ex officio deletion of the content of quality inspection by those who are part of the facts charged without going through the amendment process is unlawful.

The court below shall manufacture, import, process, use, cook, prepare, or preserve foods or additives, the standards and specifications of which are determined in accordance with the Food Sanitation Act, and shall not sell foods or additives which do not meet such standards and specifications, or manufacture, import, process, use, cook, cook, subdivide, transport, preserve or display foods or additives for sale.

In the case of fruits, germs shall be not more than 10,000 per 1g, and the germs of food poisoning, such as yellow fluorum, shall be voice.

In the process of manufacturing “U”, which is mainly an infant, etc. enjoying and drinking at the H Jincheon Factory, the Defendants were well aware of the fact that food poisoning, such as spawn and yellow spawn, continuously detected in the production process through cooling tunnels and cutting machines, in excess of the standard values, in the manufacturing process.

The Defendants, as seen above, shall not sell food poisonings if they detect food poisonings more than 10,00 per 1g or more, through quality inspections, etc., and even if they are shipped, if they detect germss or food poisoning germs above the above standard values, they shall immediately destroy or recover products, and if they detect germss or food poisoning germs above the standard values in quality inspections, they shall report such fact to the food and drug safety wife. However, even though they did not report the detection of germs or food poisoning above the standard values as above, they did not arbitrarily conduct re-inspection at a different body that does not comply with the quality inspection guidelines, and they conspired to sell them in order or implicitly.

The term "public offering" is an objection to public offering.