The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is erroneous in the misapprehension of the facts that the Defendant simply sold ice ice cream and work, and lent juice to customers who want to be juice cream without compensation, and thus, the lower court convicted the Defendant, even though he did not sell food after cooking and selling it, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. According to Article 21 subparagraph 8 (a) of the Enforcement Decree of the Food Sanitation Act based on delegation of Article 36 (2) of the Food Sanitation Act, "business of cooking and selling mainly foods, ice cream, etc., or cooking and selling foods such as scambling and selling foods, etc., or cooking and selling foods such as scambling and scaming stores." Here, the business of cooking and selling tea refers to "business of cooking and selling tea" in light of the standards for facilities of food entertainment businesses prescribed in the Enforcement Rule of the Food Sanitation Act. However, the issue of whether certain acts correspond to "cambling" should be determined by considering various circumstances such as the type and nature of foods to be handled, the method of handling them, main contents of business, etc., and whether the act in question may cause harm to sanitation caused by food, or have influence on national health due to food nutrition.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant was equipped with facilities such as freezing 1, cooling 2, and sapex in a two-dimensional space in the trade name of "C", and sold sirens, monmons, Lemons, Bana, etc., and a daily ice cream, etc., and the defendant posted a notice on "Meapmarks 2,00 won, 100 won, 200 won, and 10 days."