All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Each sentence (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and four months, confiscation, and fine for negligence for Defendant E: 50 million won) declared by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. There is no change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court on the grounds that new materials for sentencing have not been submitted in the trial, and in full view of the factors revealed in the arguments in the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing was too too excessive and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

It does not appear.

Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

3. Of the judgment below’s correction of the written judgment of the court below, each of “Food Sanitation Act” in the column 2 and 5 of the application of the statutes is a clerical error in the former Act on Origin Labeling of Agricultural and Fishery Products (amended by Act No. 14291, Dec. 2, 2016) and each of “the main text” after “Article 17” in the five parallels is apparent to have been omitted due to this error. Thus, it is corrected to correct it ex officio pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure.

4. As such, the Defendants’ appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since all of the appeals are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.