logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 충주지원 2018.06.04 2018고정18
농수산물의원산지표시에관한법률위반
Text

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who operates a general restaurant with the trade name of “D” in the Dong and Dong, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do.

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

Nevertheless, on July 14, 2017, the Defendant purchased 10 km kimchi 10 km from used Chinese red powder in the Republic of Korea in E (Representative F, Chungcheongnam-do G, and H) on July 14, 2017, and indicated the country of origin of the red powder in the Republic of Korea. 5 km from July 15, 2017 to July 20, 2017 were provided to the customer who found the place of business and kept the remainder of 5 km in the air conditioners for the same purpose.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant (the purport that he/she has provided or kept kimchi of a quantity as stated in its reasoning);

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted to the effect that he did not have the defendant's intent to commit the crime.

However, the following circumstances revealed by the evidence and evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, such as the interrogation protocol of the suspect by the special judicial police officers against the defendant, i.e., (i) the origin of the red powder used in the kimchi is China, and the defendant seems to have easily confirmed it; (ii) the kimchi in the judgment below is purchased from an enterprise other than the company that has transacted in the ordinary world, and (iii) even according to the defendant's statement, the kimchi using the red powder in Korea is 7,000 won or more than the kimchi using the red powder in Korea (the defendant purchased kimchi in 25,000 won). In light of the above, it is not true that the defendant indicates that the country of origin of the red powder used in the kimchi is different from the fact.

arrow