logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.04.06 2017고정1335
농수산물의원산지표시에관한법률위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who operates a general restaurant with the trade name "D" located in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and E B102.

A person who sells or provides agricultural or fishery products or processed agricultural or fishery products which have been required to put an indication of origin under the Act on the Establishment of New Indices of Agricultural and Fishery Products shall not sell or put a mark that may cause confusion with the country of origin on a false label.

Nevertheless, from December 21, 2016 to April 10, 2017, the Defendant purchased 130 km from E in South Korea from E in South Korea, and sold 16,443,000 won at the market price to unspecified consumers who find an enterprise from December 23, 2016 to April 11, 2017.

Summary of Evidence

1. Some statements made against the defendant during the police interrogation protocol;

1. Evidence and photographs on the place of origin violations;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted to the effect that there is a justifiable ground to believe that the defendant's act was not a crime because of the lack of the employee's point of view by the head of the business office (F), a copy of the business registration certificate, a copy of the business registration certificate, and the sales details [the defendant and the defense counsel]. However, this is merely a legal site and cannot be viewed as

In addition, although the defendant's act does not indicate the country of origin falsely but constitutes an indication of origin. However, unless it can be recognized that the defendant's act was indicated as a domestic origin only with respect to spachi, other than spawk Kim, which entered a brued brued bru, etc. on the country of origin, it is difficult to view that the defendant's act was an indication of origin on

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Origin Labeling of Agricultural and Fishery Products and the Act on Origin Labeling of Agricultural and Fishery Products selected for criminal facts (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").

arrow