logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 거창지원 2016.07.21 2016고정64
농수산물의원산지표시에관한법률위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who operates a restaurant called “C” in Gohap-gun B.

A person who sells or provides agricultural and fishery products or the processed products thereof after cooking shall not make a false indication of the place of origin or commit an act likely to cause confusion as such.

Nevertheless, from March 10, 2015 to February 18, 2016, the Defendant purchased a total of KRW 300km of 448,00 in China from D companies (Seoul Northern-gu E), and used KRW 50 km in the bulletin board, provided that the country of origin of distribution-based kimchi is "domestic origin" and provided for anti-government purposes. Of the remainder of domestic distribution-based kimchi, 200 g in the same restaurant was kept in the air conditioners located in the above restaurant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Investigation report (Calculation of transaction details);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the scene of violation, photographing photographs, and the details of detection;

1. Relevant Article 15 of the Act on the Origin Labeling of Agricultural and Fishery Products and Articles 6 (2) 1 of the Act on the Selection of Origin of Agricultural and Fishery Products (excluding punishment) concerning facts constituting an offense;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is the primary offender, and the food that the Defendant falsely marks the origin should be considered as favorable circumstances for the Defendant.

arrow