The meaning of the so-called "where the value of food or additives is not less than 10,000 won per annum but less than 1 million won at retail prices" under Article 2 (1) 2 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes.

The so-called "where the value of food or additives is not less than 10,000 won and less than one million won per annum at retail prices" in Article 2 (1) 2 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes refers to, in practice, only if the retail price of the specific food or additives generated by the criminal act in violation of the above Act is not less than 10,000 won per annum but less than one million won, and even if the crime was committed during a period of less than one year and the retail price is less than one million won, it cannot be expanded that the value converted from the annual price is more than one hundred thousand won by calculating it in a vertical way.

Article 2 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes

Defendant

Prosecutor

Sung Dong-dong branch of Seoul District Court (75 Gohap101) in the first instance court

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

One hundred and thirty days out of the detention days prior to the declaration of the original judgment shall be included in the above sentence.

The seized garrecer's 1 paper (No. 1), 1 copy (No. 5) of raw materials of beer, and 1 (No. 7) of bottled punching shall be confiscated.

The summary of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor is as follows: First, the original judgment is merely 56,00 won at the market price in this case, and it rejected the principal charges applying Article 2 (1) 2 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes, and simply recognized only the ancillary charges violating Article 2 (1) 2 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes; however, the above provisions of the Act on Special Measures are aggravated as the basis of annual manufacturing or sales volume of the food price clearly stated in the law, and if the manufacturing price of the defendant is converted into an annual amount of less than one month, it is apparent that the value would be at least 672,00 won, which is naturally subject to the above Special Measures, and the judgment below that did not reach this point is erroneous by misapprehending the legal interpretation, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment. Second, the sentence of the court below is unreasonable.

Therefore, first of all, it shall be interpreted that the so-called "when the value of food or additives is not less than 10,000 won and less than 1 million won per annum" in Article 2 (1) 2 of the above Special Measures for Appeal refers to where the retail value of specific hearts or additives arising from the criminal act in conflict with the above law is not less than 10,000 won per annum and less than 1 million won per annum. As pointed out in the above grounds of appeal, the crime was committed during a period of less than 1 year, and even if the retail value is less than 10,000 won, if the annual value converted at the price calculated retroactively is more than 10,000 won, it shall not be interpreted extensively as falling under the above provision (in fact, the result that the court below's judgment rejecting the above grounds of appeal shall not be justified and acceptable.

The second ground for appeal is examined, in light of the various circumstances such as the motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence against the defendant by the court below is deemed to be unfair because the sentence against the defendant is too uneasible. Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal in this regard has a reason to dismiss the reversal of the judgment of the court below.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the members shall be decided again after pleading.

Since the criminal facts of the defendant recognized as a party member and the summary of the evidence are the same as that of the judgment of the court below, all of them are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

The judgment below of the defendant falls under Articles 43(1), 3(2) and (1) of the Food Sanitation Act, and the defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year within the scope of the term of punishment chosen by imprisonment among the prescribed amounts of punishment. In applying Article 57 of the Criminal Act, 130 days from the number of detention days before the sentence of the judgment below shall be included in the above punishment; one for the attached punishment (No. 1), one for the beer of beer, one for the beer (No. 5), and one for the beer (No. 7) shall be confiscated by Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act, since the articles provided for the crime of this case fall under the ownership of a person other than the defendant.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Limited Jin-jin (Presiding Judge)