209Do12206 Violation of the Agricultural Products Quality Control Act

1. Kim (************************) food manufacturing and processing business, and food manufacturing and processing business.

Residential Nowon-gu Nowon-gu

Nabju City of Original domicile

Stock Company

Ham-nam, Hamyeong-gun

Representative Director Kim Byungn

Defendants

Gwangju District Court Decision 2009No1558 Decided October 14, 2009

February 11, 2010

All appeals are dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Article 15 of the former Agricultural Products Quality Control Act (amended by Act No. 9759 of Jun. 9, 2009; hereinafter referred to as the "Act") provides that "agricultural products and processed agricultural products prescribed by the Presidential Decree" as items subject to origin labeling shall be prescribed by the Presidential Decree, and the method of indication shall be prescribed by the Presidential Decree as the raw materials of the agricultural products and processed agricultural products referred to in paragraph (1) "(2) and the items subject to origin labeling and the method of marking shall be prescribed by the Presidential Decree.

Accordingly, Article 24 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 21876, Dec. 14, 2009) which provides for the method of indicating the origin of a raw material in the case of a domestic processed product (Article 24) provides for the indication of the origin of a raw material in order of the content of the raw material used in the processed product (Article 1(1)3), and the detailed matters are prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (Article 2). Furthermore, the Enforcement Rule of the

12. Article 24 of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries No. 105 of the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries) provides that "where there is any raw material used, the mixture ratio of which is not less than 50 percent, the place of origin of such raw material shall be indicated" (Article 1(1)1), and where it is necessary to enhance credibility of processed products, raw materials other than the above raw material may be indicated (Article 2).

Meanwhile, Article 17(1) of the Act prohibits a person who sells or processes agricultural products or processed agricultural products that have to indicate the place of origin under Article 15(1) from falsely marking the place of origin. As seen above, Article 15(1) of the Act prohibits a person who sells or processes agricultural products or processed agricultural products that have to indicate the place of origin. In full view of the fact that Article 15(1) of the Act prescribes the items subject to the place of origin labeling and the purport of the system of indicating the place of origin that intends to protect farmers and consumers by establishing order in the distribution of agricultural products and providing correct purchase information to consumers, if such products or processed agricultural products constitute items subject to the place of origin labeling are false, it shall be deemed that Article 17(1) of the Act is in violation of the Act. Such conclusion does not change with the fact that the contents of the country of origin labeling made with respect to the agricultural products or processed agricultural products are not those subject to the method of indicating the place of origin are arbitrarily marked

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that the act of falsely expressing the origin of the red powder, which is a raw material that requires an indication of origin, in addition to the distribution, which constitutes an item subject to the indication of origin, violates Article 17 (1) of the Act is justifiable. In so doing, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on the clarity principle of the principle of no punishment without law, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Ji-hyung

Justices Yang Sung-tae

Justices Lee Jae-chul

Jeju High Court Justice Yang Chang-soo