logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2016.08.11 2015노437
식품위생법위반
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant: (a) received 40,00 won from G and H, other than public prosecution; (b) did not engage in an alcoholic beverage and delivery business; and (c) did not engage in cryp business.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant had the same assertion in the lower court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, and the lower court, upon its detailed reasoning, convicted him of the facts charged in this case.

In light of the following facts admitted by evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the judgment of the court below is acceptable, and there is no error in the misapprehension of facts.

① The Defendant’s “D” sells 3,000 won to the tin of coffee. In the event of delivery, the Defendant additionally receives KRW 10,000 per share of the daily delivery cost and KRW 20,000 per remainder of the daily delivery cost. The basic order volume is the remainder of coffee.

The delivery of coffee seems to be mainly a female employee.

In light of such sales structure, the above multiple employees, including the Defendant, set the price exceeding three times the coffee value at the cost of delivery.

It is difficult to see that the above multilateral employee was carrying on the “teket business” in the name of the delivery cost after delivering coffees and sending time at a different place.

I seem to appear.

② At the investigation stage, the Defendant first received an order for the delivery of coffees from G and H, and thereafter purchased alcoholic beverages and eggs at the request of G and H on the way that he received the order for the delivery of coffees again from them (the multiple owners bought alcoholic beverages and liquors together with alcoholic beverages and alcoholic beverages, which were offered to Defendant G and H at the request of G and H).

) The statement was made to the effect that the alcoholic beverage and the alcoholic beverage were drinking at all times, G, H and approximately 1-hour hours were sent.

was stated.

On the other hand, G.

arrow