The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence (4 million won in penalty) that the court below rendered by the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal is deemed to be too unhutiled and unfair.

2. The judgment of the defendant reached 1,350 Maica, which was sold by using or manufacturing food additives that did not meet the publicly notified standards and specifications, and kept after the lapse of the distribution period, led to 24 kinds of food.

In light of the legislative purport, etc. of the Food Sanitation Act, which aims to contribute to the improvement of national health by preventing sanitary risks arising from the above crime content and food, such crime is not good.

However, it is also recognized that the defendant's recognition of the crime of this case is against the defendant, the case where the defendant actually caused harm to health due to the food manufactured by him is not discovered, and the defendant is the first offender.

In addition, in full view of the various circumstances such as the character, conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, and there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may change the sentencing of the court below after the judgment of the court below, it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the court below is too uneasible and unfair

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.