Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

No one shall indicate, advertise, or advertise that the name, manufacturing method, quality, and nutrition labelling of foods, etc., and the indication of tracking and control of food history, have efficacy or effect in preventing and treating diseases, or that is likely to mislead or confuse them as medicine or health functional foods, or make an exaggerated indication or advertisement.

Nevertheless, from October 23, 2015 to November 9, 2015, the Defendant sold and advertised “F”, which is a nutrition supplement on the “E” website operated by the Defendant at the D office operated by the Defendant from Namyang-si, Nam-si, and indicated and advertised that it may cause mistake and confusion as functional health foods in front of the name of the product, by indicating “F” as the “Act on the Treatment of Fits before the name of the product.”

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the suspect interrogation of some police officers against the defendant (F's statement to the effect that it is a simple nutrition supplement without any adverse treatment);

1. G statements;

1. Application of related Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense and Article 94 (1) 2-2 of the Food Sanitation Act and Article 13 (1) 1 of the same Act (Selection of punishment) of the same Act concerning selective punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendant asserted that the F Products only stated that the F Products are subject to search, so that it can be easily exposed to search, and that the F Products do not entirely state the effect of secondary treatment on the product content, etc., and therefore, it does not violate the above Act.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence presented in this Court and duly admitted, it is sufficient to make the general public mistake that the Defendant’s sales of F and the name of the refinite is effective for the prevention or treatment of the outbreak of the foregoing product.