The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (eight months of imprisonment).

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of ex officio appeal, the last sentence of Paragraph (1) of the facts charged in the instant case was examined by the prosecutor in the trial. The defendant, in advertising the name, quality, nutrition, etc. of the food, etc., "The defendant, in this regard, displayed advertisements with advertisements with the name, quality, etc. of the food, which are likely to cause confusion or confusion with health functional foods, or labels or advertisements which are different from facts or exaggerated or likely to mislead or confuse consumers, or labels or advertisements which are likely to mislead or confuse consumers in selling health functional foods, or labels or advertisements which are likely to mislead or confuse consumers in advertising the name, quality, nutrition, etc. of the food, etc.," and the last sentence of Paragraph (2) stated, "The defendant, in this case, is different from facts or exaggerated in advertising the name, quality, nutrition, etc. of the health functional foods, Article 8 (1) 4 of the former Food Sanitation Act, Article 9 (1) 2 of the former Food Sanitation Act, Article 9 (1) 4 of the Act, Article 9 (2) 4 of the former Food Sanitation Act.

3. Accordingly, the court below's decision on the ground of appeal on the grounds of ex officio reversal.