The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the violation of the Food Sanitation Act, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, stated that while selling mushrooms in the state of Lao mountain, the Defendant simply simply explained the nutritional ingredients contained in mushroom in the state, and that it would be helpful for the maintenance and promotion of health, there was no fact that the Defendant had efficacy and effect on the prevention and treatment of a specific disease.

Even if the defendant explained as stated in this part of the facts charged,

Even if such act does not constitute an "advertisement" prohibited by Article 13 (1) of the Food Sanitation Act.

2) The misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles as to the fraud is the fact that the Defendant, while selling mushroom in the Lao mountain situation, simply explained simply about the nutritional ingredients contained in mushrooms and told that it would be helpful for the maintenance and promotion of health. There was no efficacy or effect in the prevention and treatment of a specific disease, and there was no such a fact as if the said situation had efficacy or effect in the prevention and treatment of the specific disease, and the said mushroom did not sell it only with the approval to use it for food in the Republic of Korea. Thus, the Defendant did not deceiving the victims, thereby

3) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment, three years of suspended sentence, two years of observation of protection, and 120 hours of community service) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination of the misapprehension of the legal principle as to the defendant's violation of the Food Sanitation Act

(a) No person who is the summary of this part of the facts charged shall indicate or advertise that foods, etc. have efficacy or effect in preventing and treating diseases, or that foods, etc. are likely to be mistaken for or confused with medicine or health functional foods;

On January 3, 2014, the Defendant: (a) at the public relations center of the second floor of the Busan-gu Busan-gu G Cooperatives (H); (b) notwithstanding the fact that the Defendant’s purchase from I was not a plant variety approved to be used for food in the Republic of Korea.