论文部分内容阅读
案情简介:1993年6月28日上午11时,某市食品卫生监督机构两名食品卫生监督员在食品卫生检查中发现某酒店存在如下问题:1.餐具不消毒,碗内有污水珠;2.制作间无防蝇、防尘设施;3.四名在岗从业人员不穿戴工作服;4.操作间内脏乱、地面积有污水、使用容器及案板不洁。综上所述,该酒店违反了《食品卫生法(试行)》第六条第一、三、五、六、八项规定。食品卫生监督机构依据《食品卫生法(试行)》第三十七条规定,对该酒店做出以下行政处罚决定:1.责令停业改进三天。2.罚款180元。第二天群众举报该酒店无视食品卫生监督机构的行政处罚决定,于当日晚上擅自营业,营业额1200元。食品卫生监督机构接到群众举报后,立即赶赴现场调查取证核实后,认为该酒店拒不执行停业改进的处罚,违反了《食品卫生法(试行)》第三十八条规定,依据《食品卫
Brief introduction of the case: At 11:00 a.m. on June 28, 1993, two food hygiene supervisors of a food hygiene supervision institution in a certain city found the following problems in a food hygiene inspection: 1. The utensils are not sterilized, and there are sewage beads in the bowl; 2 3. No anti-flies and dust-proof facilities during production; 3. Four on-the-job employees do not wear overalls; 4. Visceral mess in the operation room, sewage on the area, unclean container and chopping board. In summary, the hotel violated Article 6, Items 1, 3, 5, 6 and 8 of the Food Sanitation Law (Trial). According to Article 37 of the “Food Sanitation Law (Trial)”, the food hygiene supervision agency shall make the following decisions on administrative sanctions against this hotel: 1. Ordered to suspend business for three days for improvement. 2. Fined 180 yuan. The next day the masses reported that the hotel ignores the decision of the administrative sanctions imposed by the food hygiene supervision agency and operated without permission on the same day with a turnover of 1,200 yuan. After receiving reports from the masses, the food hygiene supervision agency immediately rushed to the scene for investigation and evidence collection and found that the hotel refused to implement the punishment for the suspension of business improvement in violation of Article 38 of the Food Sanitation Law (Trial)