logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.10.21 2015고정1134
식품위생법위반등
Text

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. No person who outlines the facts charged shall indicate or advertise that the name, etc. of the functional health foods has efficacy or effect in the prevention and treatment of diseases, or that it is likely to mislead or confuse the name, etc. of the functional health foods with medicine, and shall indicate or advertise that the name, etc. of the foods, etc. has efficacy or effect in the prevention and treatment of diseases, or that the name, etc. is likely to be mistaken for, or confused with,

Nevertheless, around March 201, the Defendant entered into a franchise agreement with D, the representative director of C, and Seoul Guro branch (E). After being supplied 15 kinds of general processed food with D, health functional food, F, G, H, etc. from March 201 to June 201, the Defendant sold the above health functional food and general processed food to many unspecified female customers from E office located in Guro-gu Seoul to June 2011, and divided the above health functional food into advertisements where the above health functional food, etc. are recorded as if they have efficacy of disease. The Defendant prevented the transfer of cancer cells or growth of cancer cells due to the operation of accelerator and Cromoskls. The Defendant explained the basic address of all diseases, such thickness divers (e.g., heart disease, colonism, etc.), and explained the contents of “F.m. catheric urine and f.m. food,” which no longer fell into 10 months after he/she reproductive cather body, and then made use of Da 2, 30.

As a result, while selling functional health foods and general processed food, the Defendant indicated or advertised that there is efficacy or effect in preventing and treating diseases, or that there is possibility of misconception or confusion as medicine.

2. According to the records, the defendant's transaction agreement between the defendant and the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. on March 10, 201.

arrow