The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor of 5 years and fines of 30 million won, Defendant C and I shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor of 2 years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles did not have falsely advertised V as if the Defendant was a governing medicine, and there was no knowledge about whether the Defendant contained heavy metals, such as rain and mercury, and there was no intention to defraudation with regard to the fraud of paragraph (1) of the instant facts charged, and there was no intention to commit a violation of Paragraph (a) of Article 2 of the instant facts charged.

B) In addition, while using active carbon for the smoking of heavy metal in the process of manufacturing V, the product was not remaining by completely removing it, the content was found to have no standards, but the content was extremely low, and the content was extremely low, and thus, it cannot be readily concluded that the content was a product for the purpose of manufacturing V. Thus, the crime of violating the Food Sanitation Act related to Article 2-B of the facts charged in the instant case is not established. 2) The punishment (7 years of imprisonment and fine 50 million won) imposed by the lower court against the Defendant of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant C1) There was no intention to deception the Defendant with regard to the mistake of facts, and there was no intention related to false advertising even with regard to the violation of the Food Sanitation Act. (2) The punishment imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

C. Defendant D, E, and I’s sentence (Defendant D: 1 year of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended sentence, 2 years of probation, Defendant E: imprisonment, 4 years of suspended sentence, 4 years of probation, community service, 160 hours, 3 years of imprisonment) sentenced by the lower court against the Defendants is unreasonable.

2. Judgment of the court below on the part of defendant A

A. Before determining the Defendant’s grounds for appeal, the Prosecutor deleted the part of the facts charged in violation of Article 2(b) of the judgment below against the Defendant, “I use the active coal which is unusable for food as its raw material,” as stated in the facts charged in violation of the Food Sanitation Act.