logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2017.04.27 2016고정1414
축산물위생관리법위반
Text

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the violation of labelling standards for livestock products.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant reported the sales business of meat by-products in Gyeyang-gu Incheon, and sold meat by-products, such as small hair and internal organs, with the trade name of “D.” From early September 2010 to July 19, 2016, the Defendant conducted washing work by receiving meat by-products, such as small hair and internal organs, from the Agricultural Cooperative Co., Ltd. (Slaughter), the Defendant, without obtaining permission from the permitting authority, without obtaining permission for meat packaging processing business from the said “D.” The Defendant operated washing work in a way that knife knife knife knife knife knife knife and knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife.

Accordingly, the Defendant did not obtain permission from the permitting authorities for meat packaging business, cut meat by-products for sale, and processed meat packaging business to make freezing meat in packaged state.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Criminal place (List 3), business report certificate (List 6);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of photograph (List 5);

1. Relevant statutes and Article 45 (1) 6 and Article 22 (1) of the Sanitary Control of Livestock Products that are subject to the option of punishment for criminal facts, and fines;

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act on the attraction of a workhouse. (4 million won per day, a fine of four million won per suspended sentence)

1. Article 59(1) of the Criminal Code of the Suspension of Sentence (which recognizes the facts itself, and has two times the previous convictions of the same kind, but which relate to the livestock product storage business without permission, the subject of this case differs from little, and there is no other previous convictions. In light of the provisions of the Livestock Products Sanitary Control Act and its subordinate statutes, the complexity of the contents and form of the regulations, the management and supervision practice of the food and drug safety wife, which is the management supervision authority, and the status of the administrative practice and supervision of the food and drug safety wife, the defendant seems to have not been clearly aware of its illegality, and the defendant's statement and attitude in this court are the same method.

arrow