The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

For the reasons indicated in its reasoning, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment that found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “a person who intends to import food, etc.,” and “a purchaser agent,” the illegality and admissibility of search and seizure, naval investigation, error of law, etc., as prescribed by Article 19(1)1 and 2 of the former Food Sanitation Act (amended by Act No. 13201, Feb. 3, 2015).

According to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed on the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

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