An error in circumstances and laws that the person has been unaware of permission under the Food Sanitation Act;

The circumstance that the defendant was unaware of the approval of the crime of this case under the Food Sanitation Act does not constitute an act due to a mistake in the law, since it is merely merely a legal site, and it is not actively recognized that it does not constitute an act permitted by the law.

Article 16 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 4294 Form208 Delivered on October 5, 1961

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Kim Hong-tae

Seoul High Court Decision 89No615 delivered on June 23, 1989

The appeal is dismissed.

As to the Grounds of Appeal:

Article 16 of the Criminal Act provides that an act of misunderstanding that one's own act is not a crime under Acts and subordinate statutes shall not be punishable only when there is a justifiable ground for misunderstanding. It does not mean a simple site of law, but it is generally an act which constitutes a crime, but in one's special circumstances, it does not constitute a crime, and if there is a justifiable reason in recognizing that it is not a crime under Acts and subordinate statutes (see Supreme Court Decision 4294No208 delivered on October 5, 1961).

Therefore, the circumstance that the Defendant was unaware of the approval of the instant crime under the Food Sanitation Act is merely merely a legal site, and that it is not a crime that is permitted by the law. Thus, the circumstance that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the instant crime was committed by the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs on October 1986, the permission-granting authority cannot be said to be due to an error in the law.

It is without merit that this appeal is dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Kim Yong-ju (Presiding Justice)