The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is a person engaged in food manufacturing, processing, and distribution business under the trade name of C Co., Ltd.

No food manufacture and distributor shall store or sell products, the expiration date of which has passed, for the purpose of sale.

Nevertheless, on February 23, 2016, the Defendant, within the freezing warehouse located in Ulsan-si, Jung-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-si, on February 23, 2016, the distribution period of which is approximately KRW 8 km (one sealed paper: 10 grouped paper) and approximately KRW 8 km.

2. 7. By July, 200, in order to sell approximately 8 km of 2 wing paper (one sealed paper: 10 grouped paper) gold gas, stored above the freezing storage display place.

2. Although the company operating the Defendant’s gist of the defense of the Defendant, there was a fact that the Defendant stored food, the distribution period of which has elapsed, as stated in the facts charged, in the freezing warehouse, it was not kept for the purpose of sale, as well as for divided distribution to employees.

3. In light of the size of the Defendant’s operating company (the Defendant’s operating company is a wholesale and distributor which supplies meat and processed food from its producers and supplies them to a restaurant and business establishment within the organization’s premises, and whose number of employees is approximately 22, annual sales, and KRW 2,00,000), the size of freezing warehouse ( KRW 80,000), the quantity of freezing products handled by the Defendant Company, the quantity of freezing products handled by the Defendant Company, and the quantity of freezing products of this case (total of KRW 16 g, and KRW 80,00,00), etc., the fact that the Defendant stored approximately 16 km of processed food, as recorded in the facts charged of this case, in a freezing warehouse, is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant stored such processed food for sale, and there is no other evidence to support that the Defendant stored

4. In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, a judgment of innocence is rendered after Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.