The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly notified.

1. Although six items on the electronic tobacco of this case, including the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles) E, cannot be deemed as food additives as prescribed by Article 2 of the Food Sanitation Act, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the Food Sanitation Act, which affected the conclusion

2. Judgment on the misapprehension of the legal principle of the defendant

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a person who operates D, a food additives manufacturing company in Daejeon Usong-gu C.

A business operator who manufactures or processes foods, etc. shall conduct a quality inspection to ensure that persons meet the standards and specifications for foods, etc. manufactured or processed, as prescribed by Ordinance of the Prime Minister.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, from May 2014 to January 13, 2015, failed to conduct a quality inspection for six items of electronic tobacco, such as E, which are additives manufactured at the same place, from May 2014 to January 13, 2015.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged based on the evidence at that time.

(c)

1) The legal principle of punishment requires that crimes and punishment should be determined by law in order to prevent the arbitrary exercise of the state's penal authority and protect the freedom and rights of individuals.

In light of such purport, the penal laws and regulations shall be strictly interpreted, and it is not permissible to expand or analogically apply the meaning of the penal laws and regulations to the disadvantage of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do15097, Jun. 28, 2012). 2) Article 97 Subparag. 1 of the former Food Sanitation Act (amended by Act No. 13277, Mar. 27, 2015; hereinafter the same) provides that a person who violates Article 31(1) shall be punished, and Article 31(1) provides that a business operator who manufactures or processes foods, etc. shall inspect whether the foods, etc. manufactured or processed as prescribed by Ordinance of the Prime Minister meet the standards and specifications under Article 7 or 9.