beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals filed by A and C and prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.
Reasons
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal asserts that the punishment of the court below (the fine of KRW 3 million, and the fine of KRW 5 million) is too unreasonable for Defendant A and C, and that the prosecutor is too unfasible and unfair for the prosecutor.
2. We also examine the criminal defendant A and C’s unfair assertion of sentencing and the prosecutor’s improper assertion of sentencing against the defendants.
Considering the purpose of the Food Sanitation Act that aims to prevent sanitary harm caused by food and to contribute to the promotion of national health by distributing foods manufactured through manufacturers who have completed processes such as permission for, and reporting on, the fixed food in a place of business with legitimate facility standards, the act of manufacturing and processing the destroyed amount of fish without reporting the food manufacturing and processing business, and the act of Defendant C processing the processed amount of the destroyed amount of fish without reporting the food manufacturing and processing business, and the act of Defendant C processing the processed amount of the destroyed amount of fish without reporting the food manufacturing and processing business.
However, the Defendants recognized the crime of this case, Defendant A and B are the first offender who has no record of punishment for the transfer of this case, Defendant C did not have any record of punishment for the same kind of crime, and there is no record of crime exceeding the fine to Defendant C, the Defendants do not repeat again, and the fact that the Defendants did not detect the same in the salted amount of the destroyed value of this case, and the fact that the salted amount of the destroyed value of this case was entirely discarded is favorable to the Defendants.
In full view of such circumstances and other circumstances, the Defendants’ age, sexual conduct, environment, the background and motive leading up to the instant crime, and all other factors pertaining to the sentencing as indicated in the instant records and arguments, it does not seem that the lower judgment’s punishment is too heavy or it is unfair because it is too low.
Therefore, the defendants A and C's improper assertion of sentencing and the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing are without merit.
3. Conclusion.