All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Judgment on Defendant A’s appeal

A. The summary of the grounds for appeal 1) The defendant is fully responsible for the livelihood of his family as a foreign worker in an inferior labor environment. It is almost impossible for such defendant to not comply with the business owner’s order or instruction. The defendant is not aware of his responsibility in light of social norms, as there is no possibility of expectation of lawful act. 2) The sentence of the lower court on unreasonable sentencing (1.5 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

B. Determination 1) In determining the misunderstanding of facts, the father of the workplace who participated in the act of law is in the command of a criminal act by his/her superior officer, and there is no possibility of not participating in the act of law (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 99Do1911, Jul. 23, 1999). It cannot be said that there is no reason to deny the possibility of expectation of the labor conditions or economic difficulties of the defendant's lawful act. This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit. This part of the defendant's assertion is a normal situation favorable to the defendant, which is favorable to the defendant, since the defendant entered the Republic of Korea around 2005, endeavored to faithfully live in our society as a member of our society.

However, in that the crime of food sanitation is likely to cause damage to the sound distribution order and serious harm to the health of the people, its responsibility is heavy, and the number of food displayed for sale is not so much, but merely indicates the expiration date of the crime, and the quality of the crime is not good, but it is urgent to deny the defendant's mistake and transfer his responsibility to the workplace's company, so it is necessary to punish it corresponding to it.

In addition, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, and this case.