Defendant

All appeals filed by A and prosecutor are dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

A misunderstanding of the legal principles and misunderstanding of the facts by Defendant A’s wife state the F while having the certificate of qualification as agricultural product intermediaries, so the indictment against Defendant A, which is merely an act of aiding and abetting the above J, is unlawful, and thus, it should be sentenced to the judgment dismissing the prosecution against Defendant A.

Considering the period and scale of transactions between F and the Defendant B, and C (hereinafter “C”), the influence of the Defendant C, etc., this part of the crime does not constitute the crime that Defendant A independently supplied agricultural products to the domestic industry without collusion with the Defendant B, etc.

In light of the overall circumstances of the instant case of unfair sentencing, the sentence imposed by the lower court on Defendant A (ten months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution, etc.) is too unreasonable.

In light of the overall circumstances of this case against Defendant A of the public prosecutor, the sentence imposed by the court below to Defendant A is too uneasible and unfair.

Defendant

B and J consistently stated that there was a request from C for the supply of the Central Labor Relations Commission in China, and accordingly, there was a so-called confusion. Defendant B’s wife M in actual charge of Defendant B and F could have sufficiently known the difference between the import production of agricultural products and the domestic production price, but Defendant B et al.’s statement was difficult to obtain, Defendant B et al. ordered a separate packaging in which it is practically impossible to know the origin of the agricultural products supplied by F without taking any particular measures to confirm the origin of the agricultural products supplied by F, and Defendant B et al. ordered a separate packaging in which it is practically impossible to know the origin without any particular measure to confirm the origin of the agricultural products supplied by F, and Defendant B’s written request for the issuance of the orders by Defendant C et al. submitted by the court of original judgment, etc. are difficult to credibility, the lower court also determined otherwise.