Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is the representative director of the “E” corporation, which is an industrial establishment, and Defendant B is the auditor of the above company’s spouse interest as the auditor of the above company. The Defendants operated the above company and sold the food manufacturing company by manufacturing and selling the Mamanalian department while managing the above company.

A food manufacturer shall prepare documents related to the production and work records of food and documents related to the receipt and delivery of raw materials for the storage and delivery of raw materials, and the transaction records of products for three years from the date of the last entry.

Nevertheless, the Defendants conspired to sell and sell the above Franc as a raw material from October 10, 2013 to April 13, 2015, on which the advertisement containing the above Francing powder, melting powder, melting powder, and melting powder at the beginning of the year from the above E Company as the raw material from around October 10, 2013 to around April 13, 2015, and did not prepare the record of transaction of raw material receipts and products.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Information about the confirmation at the time of joint crackdown on food manufacturing and processing business;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on business registration certificates;

1. Article 97 Subparag. 6 and Article 42(1) of the former Food Sanitation Act (amended by Act No. 14022, Feb. 3, 2016; hereafter the same shall apply) on criminal facts under the relevant Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. The Criminal Procedure Act requires strict criminal punishment against food criminal who is directly connected to the daily life and health of the people for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, there is no record of criminal punishment against the Defendants for the same crime, and the punishment is determined as ordered by taking into account the two different ages of the Defendants, sex, environment, circumstances after the crime, and other various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case.

The acquittal portion

1. The summary of this part of the facts charged is different from the actual use of food’s nutrition for ingredients of raw materials.