A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who runs a general restaurant business in the name of “C” in the name of “C” at the time of sex.

No person who sells or provides agricultural and fishery products or the processed products thereof after cooking shall place a false place of origin labeling or place a mark likely to cause confusion as to such products.

Nevertheless, the defendant from January 10, 2018 to the same year.

4. Until December 12, 198, purchasing a total of 928km domestically from "D" located in Pyeongtaek-si and selling to many unspecified customers who find the above restaurant after cooking and selling a total of 74,935,907 won in the market value, indicating the origin of the above restaurant as "domestic products" on the display board of origin of the above restaurant, and the advertising banner with the entrance of the restaurant at the entrance of the restaurant was promised to collect only the highest-level domestic anti-bioticly controlled food and to always contact many customers.

“I,” and “I, 100 percent-free first-class anti-biotics only handle domestic terms.”

“The highest level of domestic production” and “the highest level of domestic production,” etc. were indicated.

Accordingly, the Defendant made a false indication of origin on agricultural and fishery products.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photograph each imported fishery product distribution history, on-site evidence photographs, trade books, confirmation books, and each letter message to the effect that the photograph is to be taken;

1. Article 14 (1) and Article 6 (2) 1 of the Act on Origin Labeling of Agricultural and Fishery Products (generally, the choice of imprisonment with prison labor) for facts constituting an offense and Articles 14 (2) and 6 (2) 1 of the same Act;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of the recommended punishment on the sentencing criteria [the scope of the recommended punishment] and the basic area (from October to two years) of the recommended punishment (the person who has no special sentencing seal]; and

2. The crime of this case committed in violation of consumer's right to choose food and trust and thus has great social harm. The defendant's profit from the crime of this case seems not to be significant, and the period of the crime is not shorter than the period and sales are significant.