The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

The above fine shall be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In full view of the fact that the instant advertisement is merely a mistake of facts made by the Defendant, and that the Defendant did not independently advertise the instant advertisement, the Defendant is not subject to punishment. (2) In full view of the fact that: (a) the instant advertisement merely emphasizes the effect within the intrinsic limit of efficacy, which is the efficacy of food, and does not constitute an advertisement that misleads or confuses the Defendant as medicine or health functional foods.

B. The lower court’s sentence (fine 1,000,000) on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the lower court: (a) applied Article 97 Subparag. 1 and Article 13(1)1 of the former Food Sanitation Act (amended by Act No. 11819, May 22, 2013) to the facts charged of the instant case; (b) however, Article 13(1) of the applicable Act regulating advertisements that are likely to mislead or confuse the quality of food as medicine or health functional foods; (c) was amended by Act No. 11986, Jul. 30, 2013 by Act No. 11986, “Article 94 Subparag. 1 and Article 13(1)1” and “Article 93 subparag. 2 and Article 13(1)1” did not appear to have been amended by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than three years or by a fine not exceeding KRW 30 million; and (d) amended by Act No. 1819, May 21, 2012.

Therefore, Article 97 Subparag. 1 and Article 13(1)1 of the former Food Sanitation Act (amended by Act No. 11986, Jul. 30, 2013) shall apply to the instant crime committed before the enforcement of Article 11819.