logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 통영지원 2016.05.16 2016고정104
식품위생법위반
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 15,00,000, and by a fine of KRW 10,000,000, respectively.

Defendant

A.

Reasons

Criminal facts

Defendant

A is the representative director of B Co., Ltd. which carries on the comprehensive fishery products distribution business in Tong Young-si, and the defendant B Co., Ltd. is a corporation.

1. No one shall indicate or advertise foods, etc., which are different from facts, or are likely to deceive, mislead or confuse consumers with regard to the names, manufacturing methods, quality and nutrition labelling, genetic re-cooperatives and food history tracking and control labelling, food or food additives, and the nutritional value of foods or additives is different from facts, raw materials, ingredients, and uses thereof;

On June 30, 2015, the Defendant: (a) sold a gift set of “D name No. 2” comprised of (150g) destroyed (150g) destroyed (150g) destroyed (150g) destroyed (150g), and (b) destroyed (150g) destroyed (150g) red (90g), captured and sold in a traditional fish-based traditional fish-based, a traditional traditional fish-related, in which the death destroyed in the set was completed and destroyed in a large tree, in which the body of destroyed and destroyed were installed in a large tree, and sold in KRW 52,250,00 to E residing in the Gyeonggi-do, which was advertised differently from the fact, as if the body of destroyed and damaged were living, and there was no one wife, and sold them in KRW 52,250.

Therefore, the Defendant, as seen above, advertised as if it were an expensive-resistant destruction, even though it was not a supplication of death through a fisheries shopping or B website from June 30, 2015 to December 3, 2015, as shown in the annexed crime chart, and sold the sum of KRW 65,90,750, total of KRW 1,140,000 from June 30, 2015 to December 3, 2015.

2. Defendant B, a representative director, had A perform the above act in relation to Defendant’s business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each investigation report and internal investigation report;

1. Promotional materials and details of advertisements on the Internet homepage;

1. Application of each statute on sales details;

1. Defendant A: Articles 95(1) and 13(1)2 of the Food Sanitation Act, and Articles 100, 95(1), and 13(1)2 of the Food Sanitation Act, and Articles 13(1) and 13(1) of the Food Sanitation Act.

arrow