The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Legal principle 1) Article 4 subparag. 7 of the Food Sanitation Act (hereinafter “instant legal provision”)

(2) The legal provisions of this case do not separately stipulate the meaning of "processing". Since it is difficult for a person who is not a business operator to know what kind of processed food is being processed, it is contrary to the principle of clarity, and it is merely a well-continction of processed food provided in the food factory, and it cannot be deemed that it constitutes processed food provided in the food factory, and therefore, in the case of manufacturing and processing livers, the defendant does not have a duty to report it.

B. The Defendant did not have a duty to confirm whether the original purchaser was a food manufacturing and processing business entity reported, and the Defendant did not know that the original purchaser was a business entity. Since they did not know that they did not report the business, the Defendant did not have an intention to commit a violation of the legal provisions of this case, since they did not know that they did not report the business.

C. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 10 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine the defendant's assertion that he is not a criminal under the legal provisions of this case. The legal provisions of this case merely provide that "no person shall sell foods, etc. manufactured, processed, processed, used, cooked, stored, subdivided, transported or displayed for sale by a person who is not a business operator, or collect, manufacture, import, process, use, cook, store, subdivide, transport or display such foods, etc. for sale."