logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 속초지원 2014.03.19 2013고정257
농수산물의원산지표시에관한법률위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of four million won.

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who operates and manages an agricultural corporation D in Gangwon-gun C located in Gangwon-gun.

No one shall place a false mark of origin or make an indication likely to cause confusion as such.

Nevertheless, the Defendant purchased 3.8 tons of tending paper mulberry (faat) from February 21, 2013 to April 25, 2013 from 2013 on three occasions, from the Sinsan-gun, Gyeongnam-gun, the Sinsan-gun, which was produced by using 1.4 tons of raw material for tending paper from the said establishment, and sold 37 tons of tending mulberry paper produced by using 1.4 tons of raw material for tending paper at the said establishment, and sold 37 tons to customers and unspecified water on packing materials and on its Internet homepage.

As a result, the defendant committed an act of making indications that could cause confusion with the country of origin labeling.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. A certificate;

1. Evidence photographic (written 12), evidence (written 3 copies), certificate of origin confirmation (written 3 copies);

1. 수사보고(꾸찌뽕 생산판매 및 재고량 조사결과) 법령의 적용

1. Relevant Articles 14 and 6 (1) 1 of the Act on Origin Labeling of Agricultural and Fishery Products and Selection of Punishment (the amount of fine shall be determined in consideration of the fact that the accused does not have any previous error, the degree of risk of confusion, the quantity of sales, etc.);

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his/her defense counsel's assertion on the assertion of the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order asserts to the purport that the indication as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment does not indicate that the country of origin of tending mulberry products is "Gangsung," and thus, it does not cause confusion as to the country of origin due to the above indication.

In this regard, each of the evidence in the holding.

arrow