The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

However, for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the Defendants: imprisonment of 2 years; imprisonment of 3 years; fine of 140 million won; imprisonment of 2 years; imprisonment of 3 years; fine of 140 million won; imprisonment of 2 years; fine of 3 years of suspended execution; fine of 120 million won) imposed by the lower court on the Defendants is unreasonable.

Defendant

A’s appeal on October 2, 2018, which was submitted by his defense counsel, did not know that the products sold by Defendant A contain “H” ingredients in violation of the Food Sanitation Act, and contains an assertion that the lower judgment convicting the Defendant of the facts charged was erroneous by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misapprehending the legal doctrine.

However, on October 2, 2018, Defendant A and his defense counsel withdrawn the factual mistake and misapprehension of the legal principles on the trial date of this court, and only the unfair sentencing grounds are the grounds for appeal.

The statement was explicitly made.

Accordingly, this court is to judge the propriety of the grounds for appeal only with respect to the unfair argument of sentencing by Defendant A.

2. The Defendants’ respective crimes of this case are sold food that may cause serious threat to an unspecified number of health, and the quality of the crime is not good.

The number of sales is many, and the sales period is several months, and in the case of sales amount, the defendant A reaches 114,970,500 won and the defendant B reaches 111,39,200 won.

It seems that there is a lot of profit gained by the defendants.

On the other hand, the Defendants had a view of reflective light while viewing all the facts charged in the instant case.

may be appointed by a person.

Defendant

A has no record of punishment for similar crimes or criminal records of imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment.

Defendant

B is subject to a disposition of suspension of indictment, but there is no history of criminal punishment.

As a superior seller of a person who sells one part of the “H” product or a senior seller of the Defendants, O, N, and E are more likely to have been sentenced to a penalty of KRW 50,354,200, respectively, for criminal proceeds of KRW 50,354,200.