Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who carries out a mail order of livestock products (Internet shopping mall) after reporting a communications sales business under the name of (E) E in Jeonyang-gun, Jeonyang-gun.

Although the Defendant did not make any false indication of the origin of agricultural and fishery products or make any indication that is likely to cause confusion thereof, the Defendant, from around August 28, 2013 to September 9, 2013, sold approximately 1,850,024.7kgg of the market price by falsely indicating the origin as if he/she had a false indication of the origin of agricultural and fishery products, to be supplied with the instant (E) Hansan, other than Jeonnamsan, which is not Jeonnam, on the Internet side, with the goods posted on the Internet, in carrying out a mail order on the Internet.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Four copies of the F Internet shopping mall posts, one copy of the details of slaughter of E company, one on-site photo (F), one copy of the sales of the F futures set, and the application of investigation reports (specific quantity in violation)-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Articles 14 and 6 (1) 1 of the Act on Origin Labeling of Agricultural and Fishery Products and the Selection of Punishment for Criminal Facts;

1. The reasons for sentencing under Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Code of the Labor Relations Commission for the purpose of selling them by falsely indicating the origin or grade of the defendant, which is approximately KRW 1,024.7k in total. In light of the fact that the distribution order of agricultural products does not harm the seller's distribution order, but the seller's trust in the purchaser of the goods, and that the profits earned by the defendant also seems to be reasonable, it is deemed that the defendant requires strict punishment against the defendant. However, the defendant's mistake is divided and against his own mistake, the defendant is the first offender without any previous conviction, the land sold by the defendant is different or the origin is not entirely different. The period of sale by the defendant is relatively relatively different.