(영문) 대전지방법원 2012.10.25 2012노1234 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2012.10.25 2012노1234

식품위생법위반등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than 11 months, and Defendant B shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than 6 months.

, however, the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. From August 10, 201 to the same year among the facts constituting a violation of the Food Sanitation Act at the time of Defendant A1’s original adjudication

9. L manufacturing up to 20. L was made by O.E.M., and the Defendant provided packaging materials only and did not participate in manufacturing, and the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) Since the victim P was aware that the instant M offered as security by the said Defendant was not a normal product, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which was erroneous in misunderstanding the fact that it did not constitute fraud, and thereby adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment. 3) The sentence of imprisonment (one year of imprisonment, confiscation) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) The victim Q knew that the instant red ginseng was not a normal product, and purchased at a low price. As such, the Defendant did not commit a crime of fraud because the Defendant did not deceiving the victim Q. Furthermore, the part of the crime of fraud against the victim Q did not have any supporting evidence other than the confession of the said Defendant. Therefore, the lower court’s judgment convicting the Defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. (2) The sentence (6 months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

C. As to the fraud against the victim F, the prosecutor (Defendant A) found that the above defendant was guilty of the charge by deceiving the victim F by deceiving the victim F. However, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant not guilty of this part of the charge is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The sentence of the court below against the defendant A is too unreasonable and unfair.

2. We decide on Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of facts.

참조조문

-식품위생법

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2012.10.19 2012노141

-서울북부지방법원 2016.04.07 2016노340

-창원지방법원 2013.05.16 2013노347

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.06.24 2013노3493

-청주지방법원 2015.10.15 2015노245