beta
Text
The judgment below
The parts against the Defendants are reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months and by imprisonment for Defendant B.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant of the Prosecutor’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing against Defendant B of the instant case made one-name “Twit” by printing numbers and pictures in a specific type of material on the drum card and the back of the Twit, and sold contact lenses, which is a medical device capable of distinguishing it, as sets, and sold contact lenses, which is a medical device that did not obtain a product license or file a product report, and stored them for sales purposes.
However, even though the seized evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 8, 10 through 30 were used for all crimes, or the defendant's sales of contact lenses for the purpose of use in fraud gambling is promoted or facilitate, or is provided for criminal acts and subject to confiscation, the court below erred by forfeiture only Nos. 1, 8, and 300,000, which was confiscated.
B. Defendant A’s assertion 1 of the facts charged is subject to punishment for selling or storing contact lenses, which is a medical device for which an unspecified defendant did not obtain an item approval or did not report an item item, and the prosecutor did not specify the quantity sold or stored contact lenses in the facts charged, and thus, did not specify the facts charged. (ii) The quantity of sales of contact lenses, which is a medical device subject to the punishment of unfair sentencing, is considered in the sentencing. Since the sales revenue of one name “Twit Card” is not criminal proceeds of the instant case, it shall not be considered in the sentencing. The Defendant participated in the criminal act by B; the Defendant purchased contact lenses through B; and the Defendant purchased contact lenses through B; and other circumstances favorable to the Defendant, etc., the lower court’s imprisonment (Articles 31 through 39, 43 through 60) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.
C. Criminal proceeds acquired by Defendant B’s assertion are proceeds from the sale of contact lensess subject to the violation of the Medical Devices Act, and thus, it is reasonable to consider the sales proceeds of one name card in sentencing.