beta
(영문) 대법원 1985. 3. 12. 선고 84도2892 판결

[보건범죄단속에관한특별조치법위반·약사법위반][집33(1)형,548;공1985.5.1.(751),582]

Main Issues

Criteria for determining whether it is a drug subject to the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act regulation

Summary of Judgment

Medicines under the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act shall be construed as including all the concepts (excluding single appliances, machinery, and cosmetics) that are used for the diagnosis, treatment, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of diseases of human beings or animals, or that are used for the purpose of exerting pharmacological functions in the structure or function of human body or animals, and shall always be defined as the name of the material regardless of the existence of any efficacy in the pharmacological action, regardless of the purpose of use indicated, efficacy, efficacy, effect, usage, volume, publicity or explanation at the time of sale, etc. of the material being visually perceived as food in light of the general public in light of the general public.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 2 of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act

Defendant

Defendant

Appellant

Defendant and Prosecutor

Defense Counsel

Attorney Kim Hong-tae

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 84No2005 delivered on November 14, 1984

Text

All appeals are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The grounds of appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel are examined together.

The Pharmaceutical Affairs Act defines drugs and uses them for the purpose of diagnosis, treatment, mitigation, treatment or prevention of human or animal diseases (No. 2) 2. The purpose of this Act is to properly regulate their manufacturing, sale, quality control, etc. to prevent the occurrence of harm to people's life and body and to contribute to the improvement of national health. In light of the legislative purpose and purpose of this Act, drugs mentioned above should be determined by considering the following as a whole for the purpose of diagnosis, treatment, mitigation, treatment or prevention of human or animal diseases (No. 2.) or for the purpose of using them in the structure or function of human or animal (no. 3.). Thus, the purpose of this Act is to properly regulate their manufacturing, sale, quality control, etc. to prevent the occurrence of harm to people's life and body and to contribute to the improvement of national health. In light of the aforementioned legislative purpose and purpose, drugs listed above should be deemed as having the effect of the Act, and if they are used for the purpose of diagnosing, treating, treating, treating or preventing human or animal diseases, or if they are aware of the efficacy or efficacy function of the Act.

According to the records, the defendant's sale of c, paper, gal, gal, (C.G. Glisten) is manufactured by putting fluorum 200 fluorg and blurg 800 glusium in a capsule, which are mineral quality in 1 caps, and its appearance and shape only have the appearance and shape similar to other medicines because they were contained in a capsulule. The defendant, while carrying out as the head of the "Korea Adult Disease Management Institute" and selling the c, paper, and glusium in this case, he did not have the same effect as the c, paper, and so, it seems sufficient that social general members are aware that they were manufactured for the purpose of treating or preventing human disease (c.G. g. g. urine, etc.) and therefore, it constitutes a medicine as defined in Article 2 (4) 2 of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act. Ultimately, if the above c, lease, and glusium were not legitimate in the judgment below's grounds for appeal.

2. Prosecutor's grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below found the defendant not guilty on the ground that the court below did not believe the evidence of the theory of the lawsuit that corresponds to the facts that the capsululule manufactured 990 disease without obtaining permission and marketing approval, in light of the reasons and opposing evidences, or did not admit the above facts charged (the statement in the court of first instance, Kim Young-ro, the prosecutor's office of gambling, or the court of first instance, as pointed out in the theory of the lawsuit, are all rejected for the same purport). Accordingly, the part of the charges that the defendant sold weather, paper, and galine solution manufactured without permission is also not guilty. In comparison with the records, the court below's examination of the process of cooking the evidence that was followed in taking such measures is just, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence against the rules of evidence, such as the theory of the lawsuit, and there is no ground for appeal.

Therefore, all appeals by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Justice)

심급 사건
-서울고등법원 1984.11.14.선고 84노2005
본문참조조문