[Defendant A] The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the above sentence shall be executed for two years from the date of the final judgment.

Punishment of the crime

No one shall indicate any false content on the basis of the date of manufacture, distribution period, etc. of foods, etc.

Defendant

A is the representative of "E", which is a food company that manufactures and sells cattle, singing, and singlings, etc. located in P of Manyang-si, Manyang-si, and Defendant B is the director of "E" management division.

1. Defendant A’s sole criminal conduct had the intention to extend the period of distribution by replacing the Korean language displayer, which did not receive any product the distribution period of which is imminent, with the intention to extend the period of distribution by falsely indicating the date of manufacture at the later date than the actual date of production.

The Defendant, around January 5, 2012, at the above “E”: (a) the distribution period of “F”, which is the kind of phishing food, expired; (b) the Defendant removed the Korean signer attached to the product, under the direction of the employees of the said companies, including G, from the date of manufacture; (c) affixed a new Korean signer stated as “from the date of manufacture:: December 11, 201; (d) six months from the date of manufacture to the date of manufacture; (c) indicated the fact that the date of manufacture was extended to six (90,00 won) by displaying the date later than the date of manufacture; and (d) indicated six (908 (7,713, 320,000 won) in the attached Table No. 1-378, around that time, by extending the distribution period to a total of 378 times from January 31, 2013 to the date of sale.

2. The Defendants conspired to extend the period of distribution by replacing the Korean language display so that they did not receive the products whose distribution period is imminent in the customer’s place of business, and by falsely indicating the date of manufacture at the later date than the actual date of manufacture.

Defendants: (a) around March 1, 2013, at the foregoing “E”; (b) the circulation period of “I”, which is a kind of phishing food, expired; and (c) Defendant B et al.