All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant C and D’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles 1) Defendant C and D are Defendant E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant E”) and Defendant E Co., Ltd.

A) On September 201, 201, membership of the Defendant company is around September 201, and they are merely in charge of the education of salespersons, and they do not have any advertisement of products against many and unspecified persons, and they do not participate in the production of advertisements. 2) The Defendant company’s advertising content merely indicates that the products are not medicine, but food, and it is merely indicating that the ingredients included therein are effective for a specific disease. Thus, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant company’s advertising content led to the

3) Nevertheless, the lower court found Defendant C and D guilty of each of the facts charged in the instant case by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles. (b) In so doing, the lower court’s sentence against Defendant A, C, and D on the assertion of unfair sentencing on the grounds of Defendant A, C, and D (Defendant A’s imprisonment with prison labor for two years, suspended execution for three years, a fine of 30,000,000, a community service order for 240 hours, a fine of 30,000,000 won, and Defendant C’s fine of 20,000,000 won are too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the appeal by the Defendant Company, the Defendant Company failed to submit the appellate brief within the lawful period for submission of the appellate brief even after filing a petition of appeal on September 3, 2015, and received the notification of the receipt of the trial record on October 16, 2015 (it does not include the grounds for appeal in the appellate brief). Even if examining ex officio the grounds for appeal alleged in the appellate brief after the lapse of the period for submission of the appellate brief, there is no reason to reverse the lower judgment even after examining ex officio,

Therefore, in accordance with Article 361-4(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, a decision to dismiss an appeal by a defendant company should be made, but as long as a judgment is rendered on the remaining defendants' appeal, a decision to dismiss an appeal shall not be made separately and a judgment shall

B. Defendant C and D’s assertion of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles.