All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant B, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment convicting Defendant B of the facts charged on the grounds as stated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the “sale” and “sale” as prescribed in the main sentence of Article 44(1) of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, and “sale” as prescribed in Article 18(1) of the Medical Appliances Act, and by misapprehending

2. As to the Defendant D’s grounds of appeal, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment convicting Defendant D of the facts charged against Defendant D (excluding the portion not guilty of the first instance judgment) on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “sale” under the main sentence of Article 44(1) of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act and “sale” under Article 17(1) of the former Medical Devices Act (amended by Act No. 1430, Dec. 2, 2016). In so doing, it did not err by misapprehending the principle of prohibition of extended interpretation derived from the principle

3. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant H, I, and J, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment convicting Defendant H, I, and J of the facts charged, on the grounds as stated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court erred by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, or by exceeding the bounds of the judgment of the lower court, Article 47(1) of the former Pharmaceutical Affairs Act (amended by Act No. 13598, Dec. 22, 2015; and enforced March 30, 2016).