The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant does not constitute a case where the Defendant, at the time of conducting a business, indicated the origin as a standing signboard at the entrance, and thus, made an indication that is likely to cause confusion as to the origin.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 500,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the court below acknowledged the fact that the defendant, as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below, sold roasting roasting roasting and Chinese Chinese roasting Kimchi, with the origin of swine roasting as "domestic/U.S. acid," and indicated the origin of Korean roaschi as "domestic/China country," and indicated as "domestic/China country," which could lead to confusion of origin.

The Defendant alleged that he had installed a standing signboard which accurately states the place of origin in front of the restaurant during business hours. However, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant alleged that he had installed a standing signboard which is marked the place of origin in front of the restaurant; or (b) there was no act such as presenting a standing signboard which is kept inside the restaurant; and (c) the Defendant asserted that he had installed a standing signboard by presenting photographs taken by a senior judicial police officer of the National Agricultural and Rural Quality Management Service’s office at the National Office, but there was no evidence verifying the photographing date; (d) it is difficult to view that the Defendant installed a standing signboard as alleged in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the lower court, and even if the Defendant installed a standing signboard in front of the restaurant as alleged by the Defendant, it is indicated the place of origin as shown in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the lower court.