A. In light of the legal principles, the Defendant was in an excessive room over 47 times from July 22, 2015 to April 5, 2019. However, the Defendant received KRW 5,000 as medical expenses each prescription period.

The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to additional collection, which collected 49,486,968 won from the defendant, even though the defendant was 235,000 won from the proceeds of the crime of this case.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of suspended execution for six months of imprisonment, additional collection of KRW 49,486,968) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As the confiscation or collection under Article 67 of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. does not aim at deprivation of benefits from a criminal act, but rather is a disposition of a punitive nature, there is no benefit from such crime.

The court shall order the additional collection of the value, and if there are many persons who have committed a crime with regard to the scope of the additional collection, the court shall order each person to collect the total amount of the drug value within the scope he/she handles.

(2) The court below erred in misapprehending the legal principles as to additional collection under the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., and did not err in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to additional collection under the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., within the scope of its handling.

This part of the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

B. As a doctor, the Defendant issued a prescription for narcotics or psychotropic drugs for purposes other than his/her duties, even though he/she is well aware of the fact that the misuse or abuse of narcotics or psychotropic drugs causes physical or mental dependence and is likely to cause harm to public health.

The Defendant prescribed not only B (hereinafter referred to as “B”) but also in the name of a third party, and prescribed narcotics.