All appeals concerning the counterclaim of the defendant (the plaintiff) and the counterclaim claims expanded in the trial of the party are dismissed.

1. The assertion and judgment on the counterclaim

A. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is that the Plaintiff displayed the food supplied to the Defendant’s retail store and on the part of the Defendant’s obligation to manage the circulation deadline, but displayed the Jinsle, which was supplied to the Defendant store, with the lapse of the circulation deadline, and accordingly, the Defendant was subject to a disposition of penalty of KRW 11.7 million by the competent authority.

Therefore, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 11.7 million with the amount of indemnity and the amount of delayed damages.

B. The Plaintiff supplied foodstuffs to the Defendant’s retail store, and the Defendant was subject to a disposition imposing a penalty surcharge of KRW 11.7 million (hereinafter “instant penalty surcharge”) on the ground that the Defendant displayed four of the original copy of the sampling of which the distribution period (up to November 10, 2018) had elapsed from the Suwon-si Office of Suwon-si, the fact that the Defendant was subject to a disposition of imposition of a penalty surcharge of KRW 1.7 million (hereinafter “instant penalty surcharge”) on the ground that the original copy of the sampling of which was in circulation period was displayed

However, according to Articles 44(1)3, 75(1)13, and 82(1) of the Food Sanitation Act, the person liable to pay the penalty surcharge of this case is the defendant or his employee, who is the business operator, and the person liable to pay the penalty surcharge of this case, whose distribution period has expired. The evidence submitted by the defendant alone has a duty to manage food distribution based on the food supplied to the plaintiff.

The recognition is insufficient, and there is no other evidence to prove it.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

2. Conclusion, the defendant's counterclaim shall be dismissed due to the lack of reason, and the judgment of the court of the first instance is just in its conclusion, and all appeals against the defendant's counterclaim and claims for the counterclaim expanded in the trial of the court of the first instance are dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition.