logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 남원지원 2016.03.08 2015고정89
내수면어업법위반등
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,00 and by a fine of KRW 1,00,000, respectively.

The above fine is imposed against the Defendants.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. A person who intends to carry on the business of gathering shellfish in inland waters in violation of the Inland Water Fisheries Act by the Defendants obtain permission from the head of the Si/Gun/Gu, but the Defendants conspired to obtain inland water fishery permission from the Namwon-si, Namwon-si without obtaining permission for inland water fishery from the Namwon-si, Namwon-si, and collected a large quantity of dives by using a towing net for gathering shellfish, while taking divings around 00:50 on June 29, 2015.

2. Defendant A’s violation of the Food Sanitation Act is a person who runs the business of selling multilateral extractions, etc. in the name of “G” from Namwon-si, Namwon-si.

No one shall make any false, exaggerated or secret labelling or advertisement with respect to the names, manufacturing methods, quality and nutrition labelling, genetic materials, cooperatives, foods, etc. and the indication of tracking and control of food history, and no exaggerated packaging shall be allowed for packages.

From November 2014, the Defendant made a false advertisement on the manufacturing method of food by advertising differently from the fact that the Defendant was directly manufactured, even though he did not directly produce drupture extractions, and was supplied from other companies, even though he did not directly produce druptures, as if he was directly manufactured.

Summary of Evidence

[Judgment No. 1]

1. The Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Legal statement of the witness H;

1. The protocol concerning the interrogation of each police suspect against the Defendants

1. Statement made by the police with H;

1. The Defendants and the defense counsel asserts to the effect that the crime of violating the Inland Fisheries Act is not established, since the Defendants did not collect divers from the police officer’s control at the time when they received H’s report, the report of internal investigation (as to the suspected person’s statement B in Korea), the report of internal investigation (as to the suspected person’s statement B), the report of internal investigation (in detail as to the suspect’s body list), and the report of investigation (as to the photograph of the suspect’s use, etc.).

arrow