Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who operates a food manufacturing and processing business corporation E in Daejeon Seo-gu D.

If necessary for national health, the Minister of Food and Drug Safety may determine and publicly announce standards for the labels of foods or food additives for sale, and shall not sell, import, display, transport, or use for business, foods, etc., the standards for labels of which are determined accordingly, unless they are indicated in compliance

However, around October 8, 2014, the Defendant purchased four mills (25 kilograms per minute 250,000) from F, a food subdivision establishment, without labels of food or food additives, from F, and manufactured or processed “G” using them, and sold “G” equivalent to approximately KRW 9.5 million from the beginning of January 2015 to the beginning of January 2015, and used food, etc. for business purposes without labels meeting the standards for sale.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Product photographs;

1. Application of the statutes governing the place of account, production, and work records;

1. Relevant Article of the Acts and subordinate statutes concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 97 subparagraph 1 and 10 (2) of the Food Sanitation Act that choose a penalty;

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

1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

A. On October 8, 2014, the Defendant: (a) purchased four copies of the bees with marks that meet the standards; and (b) damaged or lost the marks during the transport and handling process.

In this case, it cannot be said that the violation of the Food Sanitation Act is established due to the violation of display standards.

B. The Defendant purchased four copies of the punishment as indicated in the judgment on October 8, 2014, and it is difficult to view that the Defendant purchased four copies of the punishment at the Defendant’s place of business, and it is difficult to view that the four parts of the above four parts were either intended or diminished. It is reasonable to view that there was no indication from the time four parts of the above punishment were entered the Defendant’s

And the Food Sanitation Act.