logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2017.11.02 2017고정1938
식품위생법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who operates food entertainment business in the name of "C" in two weeks.

A food entertainment business operator shall comply with the matters to be observed by business operators, etc. prescribed by the Food Sanitation Act in order to maintain business hygiene and order, and promote public health, and accordingly, livestock products without labeling all matters to be indicated under Article 6 (1) of the Livestock Products Sanitary Control Act shall not be used for cooking food.

Nevertheless, from May 22, 2017 to May 23, 2017, the date of detection, Defendant 2: (a) prepared 2 plate (60 intervention) equivalent to the non-labeling column (60 intervention) under the Livestock Products Sanitary Control Act with no indication under the Livestock Products Sanitary Control Act; and (b) provided customers with the non-labeling column 8 plate (240 intervention) at the time of detection.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. On-site photographs and written statements of the preparation of D (the details of purchase of a non-marked column);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries, such as criminal history;

1. Article 97 subparagraph 6 of the relevant Act and Articles 97 and 44 (1) 8 of the Food Sanitation Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The grounds for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for the order of provisional payment are as follows: (a) the Defendant recognized the criminal facts of this case and reflects his mistake; and (b) the primary offender who has no record of criminal punishment is recognized as a favorable circumstance for the Defendant.

On the other hand, however, the Defendant’s crime of this case committed in the preparation of food on which the indication under the Sanitary Control of Livestock Products Act is not indicated, in light of the content and method of the crime, the legislative intent of the Food Sanitation Act, etc., and the quality of the crime is not less than that of the crime; the general amount of punishment in the same and similar cases; and the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, as shown in the argument of this case.

arrow