The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal (two years of suspended sentence to one year of imprisonment) is deemed to be too unhutiled and unfair.

2. The judgment is based on the fact that the Defendant, while working as a business employee who belongs to the branch office of the victim company, provided profits to a wholesaler in a manner that gives ex post discount to the drug price of the wholesaler to the victim company, and offered rebates to the medical institution through the wholesaler. The Defendant, who publicly recruited with the operator P of the director-general of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. and publicly recruited with the victim company, obtained an ex post discount in an amount equivalent to KRW 884,80,000,000 from the victim company, and actually acquired the difference after selling the drug to the other wholesaler (442,400,000).

The criminal liability of the defendant is very heavy in light of the method of crime and the amount of property gains acquired.

However, at the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was only punished by a fine of two times for the instant crime, and all of the instant crimes are recognized, and the mistake is divided.

The intent or motive of the victim company's non-legal profit trend is likely to cause or facilitate the defendant's crime, and these circumstances are the factors of special sentencing in sentencing guidelines.

In light of the statement of accomplice P, only the amount of KRW 100 million was actually attributed to the defendant among the property profits acquired by the instant crime, and the defendant deposited KRW 50 million in order to recover damage.

The equity should be taken into account when a judgment is rendered concurrently with the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc.) in the first head of the crime committed in the judgment of the court below.

In addition to these circumstances, the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, and various conditions of sentencing, including circumstances after the crime, and there are no new circumstances to change the sentence of the lower court, compared to the first instance court.