logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고법 1977. 7. 8. 선고 76노251 제2형사부판결 : 확정
[보건범죄단속에관한특별조치법위반피고사건][고집1977형,206]
Main Issues

"Standards prescribed by Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes" in Article 2 (1) 1 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes.

Summary of Judgment

Article 2(1)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes provides that "the standards for "any significant harm" shall be separately prescribed by Presidential Decree pursuant to Article 8 of the same Act, and Article 4 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that "the standards for substantial harm to human body" are not included in cases where tyres are added to the powder powder, and it cannot be deemed that the standards listed in Article 4 of the same Decree are merely an example. Therefore, the court below is justified in applying the above special measures to the so-called "any harm acquired for the purpose of sale by the defendant, for which tyresponding tyres are added to tyrespos."

[Reference Provisions]

Article 2 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes, Article 6 of the Food Sanitation Act

Escopics

Defendant

Appellant. An appellant

Prosecutor

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul Criminal Court of the first instance (75 Gohap591)

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The gist of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor is as follows: first, since the foundation powder added with typhe is seriously harmful to the human body; second, that the defendant purchased and preserved for the purpose of selling such foundation powder falls under Article 2 (1) 1 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes and Article 6 (2) of the Food Sanitation Act, the court below applied only the Food Sanitation Act; second, the court below erred in applying the law; second, the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

Therefore, first of all, the first point of appeal is that the criteria for "any harm remarkably harmful" under Article 2 (1) 1 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes are separately prescribed by Presidential Decree pursuant to Article 8 of the same Act. The criteria for "any harm significantly harmful to human body" under Article 2 (1) 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes are not included in the cases where typhe is added to the molds, and it cannot be viewed that the criteria listed in Article 4 of the above Enforcement Decree are nothing more than the case where typhe is added to the molds, and since the court below is just in applying the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes, the reasons for appeal by the prosecutor on this point cannot be accepted. Second, the second point of appeal is examined as to the second point of appeal, and the prosecutor's motive, means, degree of damage, degree of damage, Defendant's age, character, environment, criminal record, etc., which are legally investigated by the court below after the crime are inappropriate and it is not acceptable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (5) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Kim Sang-won (Presiding Judge)

arrow