Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the importance of food safety in schools and highlights typical cases of violations to deter illegal activities related to food safety in educational institutions [2]. Group 1: Case Summaries - Case 1: A defendant was sentenced to 7 years in prison for adding sodium nitrite to school lunches, resulting in food poisoning for 56 students [3][4][6]. - Case 2: A defendant was sentenced to 7 months in prison for selling duck meat disguised as beef to a university cafeteria, with sales amounting to over 120,000 yuan [7][8]. - Case 3: A defendant was sentenced to 3 years in prison for embezzling 547,000 yuan from a student nutrition program by substituting chicken legs with wings and falsely reporting expenses [10][12]. Group 2: Legal Implications - The court's decisions reflect a strict stance against food safety violations in schools, aiming to protect students' health and deter similar crimes [6][12]. - The use of sodium nitrite, while permitted in certain meat products, is heavily regulated, and violations can lead to severe legal consequences [5][6]. - The cases illustrate the legal repercussions for fraudulent practices in food supply chains, emphasizing the need for compliance with food safety standards [8][12].

Group 1 - The Supreme People's Court has released eight typical cases related to food safety in schools to strengthen the judicial work on campus food safety and deter violations [1] - The cases cover criminal, civil, and administrative categories, involving various stakeholders from suppliers to regulatory bodies, and address issues such as food labeling, shelf life, and the use of inferior ingredients [1] Group 2 - A restaurant owner was sentenced for food poisoning caused by the illegal use of sodium nitrite in meals supplied to a primary school, resulting in 56 students being hospitalized [2][3] - The court found that the defendant's actions constituted the crime of producing and selling food that does not meet safety standards, leading to a seven-year prison sentence and a fine [2] Group 3 - A supplier was convicted for selling duck meat disguised as beef to school cafeterias, resulting in a sentence of seven months in prison and a fine of 100,000 yuan [4] - The defendant's actions were classified as selling inferior products, highlighting the legal consequences of food fraud in educational institutions [4] Group 4 - A financial manager involved in the rural compulsory education student nutrition improvement program was sentenced for embezzling funds by substituting chicken legs with chicken wings, illegally obtaining over 543,000 yuan [5] - The court ruled that the defendant's actions constituted embezzlement due to the misuse of entrusted funds, resulting in a three-year prison sentence and a fine of 200,000 yuan [5]

新京报讯(记者行海洋)全国大中小学校和幼儿园新学期开学之际，9月11日，最高人民法院发布涉校园 食品安全典型案例，涵盖了从食材供应商、供餐饭店到监管主体，从过期食品、伪劣食材到滥用食品添 加剂等不同类型的食品安全案件。 鸭肉价格低廉，不法分子以假充真，使用鸭肉冒充价格较高的牛羊肉对外销售，牟取非法利益。因鸭肉 外观和口感与牛羊肉有明显差异，不法分子通常采用添加牛油、羊油或者牛羊肉调味料等方式仿制牛羊 肉味道，并采用肉干、肉卷、肉丸等不宜区分肉品原形态的方式加以掩饰，给消费者鉴别真伪造成困 难。 最高法指出，学校食堂食品安全关系到广大学生切身利益，无论是自行经营还是对外承包，都应当加强 监管，在食材采购过程中选择规范、有资质的供应商，并加强对食材的查验把关，确保为学生提供安全 可靠的餐食。根据刑法规定，生产、销售伪劣产品"销售金额五万元以上不满二十万元的，处二年以下 有期徒刑或者拘役"，被告人罗某销售伪劣产品金额总计12万余元，到案后认罪认罚，法院在对其判处 有期徒刑七个月刑罚的同时，追缴其违法所得，并依法处以十万元罚金，充分发挥了刑罚的惩治作用。 法院经审理认为，被告人罗某在产品中以假充真，销售金额达12万余 ...

鸭肉卷冒充牛肉卷、鸡腿变鸡翅根……校园食品安全典型案例公布 中新网9月11日电 据最高人民法院微信公众号消息，近年来，最高人民法院单独或者会同有关部门制定 发布《关于办理危害食品安全刑事案件适用法律若干问题的解释》《关于审理食品药品纠纷案件适用法 律若干问题的规定》《关于审理食品药品惩罚性赔偿纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的解释》等一系列食品 安全领域司法解释，不断完善惩治食品安全违法犯罪法网。其中，针对中小学校园及其周边"五毛食 品"突出的问题，在《关于办理危害食品安全刑事案件适用法律若干问题的解释》中明确将"在中小学校 园、托幼机构及周边面向未成年人销售的"作为加重处罚情节，体现了司法机关对校园食品安全和未成 年人食品安全的特殊保护。 为进一步加强校园食品安全审判工作，以案释法，有力震慑涉校园食品安全违法犯罪，保障广大师生身 体健康和生命安全，形成全社会共同维护校园食品安全的浓厚氛围，在2025年全国食品安全宣传周期间 暨全国大中小学校和幼儿园新学期开学之际，最高人民法院遴选发布8个涉校园食品安全典型案例。此 次发布的典型案例涵盖刑事、民事、行政三类案件，主要有以下几个特点： 一是为校园食品安全提供全方位司法保 ...

Core Viewpoint - The absence of "fatty pork rolls" in the hot pot market is attributed to the inherent characteristics of pork compared to beef, which make it less suitable for thin slicing and quick cooking methods like hot pot [4][10]. Group 1: Characteristics of Meat Rolls - There are two main types of beef rolls: original cut beef rolls, which are pure beef without additives, and restructured meat rolls, which are made from various parts of the animal combined with additives [2][11]. - Original cut meat rolls are preferred for hot pot due to their ability to cook quickly and maintain texture, while pork does not perform well in this regard due to its loose muscle fiber structure [4][6]. Group 2: Comparison of Pork and Beef - Pork's muscle fiber bundles are more loosely arranged than those of beef, making it difficult to slice thinly without falling apart [4][6]. - The tensile strength of pork is lower than that of beef, which affects its ability to maintain shape when sliced thinly [7]. - Beef has a higher content of connective tissue, which contributes to its juiciness and ability to retain moisture compared to pork [7][8]. Group 3: Safety Concerns - Pork is associated with a higher risk of trichinosis due to the presence of Trichinella spiralis, making it less suitable for cooking methods that do not ensure thorough cooking [8][9]. - The recommended cooking temperature for pork to eliminate parasites is higher than what is typically achieved in hot pot cooking [8][9]. Group 4: Market Dynamics - The cost of beef is significantly higher than that of pork, leading to the prevalence of restructured meat products that may use pork or other meats disguised as beef [14][15]. - The use of transglutaminase in restructured meat production has blurred the lines between different types of meat, making it difficult for consumers to discern the actual content [12][13].