logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2020.12.10 2020고정663
농수산물의원산지표시에관한법률위반
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.

Defendant

If A does not pay the above fine, it shall be 100.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On January 5, 2016, the Defendants were prosecuted for committing a crime that “the Defendants falsely indicated the origin” and each fine of KRW 5 million was imposed on the violation of the Act on Origin Labeling of Agricultural and Fishery Products at the Gwangju District Court on January 13, 2016, and the said judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

1. Defendant A is a person who manufactures functional health foods using medicinal herbs in the name of “stock company B” in the Jeonnam Ma-gun C.

No person who sells or provides agricultural and fishery products or the processed products thereof after cooking shall place a false indication of the place of origin or place a mark likely to cause confusion therewith.

Nevertheless, from January 1, 2017 to January 9, 2020, the Defendant purchased approximately 168kg in China, Chinese fishing village, 60kg in China, China’s 64kg in China, China’s 48kg in China, China’s 6kg in China, China’s 6kg in China, China’s 6kg in 6kg in China, Chinese flager, 6kg in China, 6kg in China, 12kg in China, 18kg in China, 60 g in China, 60 g in China, 60 g in China, 12k in China, 18k in China, from “F” to “F” in “B” company, and after manufacturing approximately 2,111 m in Korea, indicated the origin of the products as “in Korea,” such as the Chinese uination of materials and so on.

As a result, the Defendant was sentenced to punishment for an offense under Article 14(1) of the Act on Origin Labeling of Agricultural and Fishery Products and again violated Article 6(2) of the same Act within five years after the sentence became final and conclusive.

2. The Defendant Company B, a representative of the Defendant Company, committed the above violation regarding the Defendant’s business at the date and time, and at the place specified in the above paragraph (1).

Summary of Evidence

1. The records of the Defendants’ seizure of their respective legal statements

1. One closure of GF and one closure of H shopping mall (I)

1. A field photograph (State B), a perusal of documents related to product production, and a product manufactured in the Bank of Bankruptcy.

arrow