Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

It changed ex officio to the facts of the crime that this court found guilty.

No medical person shall be provided with economic benefits for the purpose of adopting medicines or inducing to prescribe medicines from the supplier of medicines.

From October 201 to June 2012, the Defendant received cash equivalent to 10-20% of the prescribed amount at the rate of 10-20% in return for prescribing a capsule, which is sent from the employees E belonging to the D Business Department, Co., Ltd., a pharmaceutical supplier, for a period of time from around October 201 to around June 201, at the “C” office operated by the Defendant located in the second floor of Jeju Branch B building.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part concerning the witness E’s legal statement, and part concerning the witness E’s examination in the second public trial protocol;

1. Recording recording and reporting of a record (Evidence of evidence 292);

1. Two copies of a record of recording, a report and a record of recording (Evidence of evidence of 316 pages);

1. One copy of the decision on non-prosecution of the Incheon District Prosecutors' Office (Evidence records 326 pages);

1. Photographs (in relation to the admissibility of each police suspect interrogation protocol against E, E is a violation of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act in relation to the violation of the Medical Service Act, and the Defendant’s payment of the prescribed price for medicines, based on the same factual basis, and thus constitutes a hostile accomplice relationship.

Since the defendant denies the contents of each police interrogation protocol (Article 10, 11, 12, and 13 at the same time) against the suspect E in the provoking, it is not possible to admit admissibility of each police interrogation protocol as evidence.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 88-2 and the main sentence of Article 23-2 (1) of the former Medical Service Act (Amended by Act No. 14438, Dec. 20, 2016);

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;

1. On December 30, 2010, the Defendant received 12 million won as the name of rebates from E on December 30, 2010, as the fact of a violation of the Medical Service Act, which was subject to the judgment ex officio (a comprehensive crime) after the second sentence of Article 88-2 of the former Medical Service Act.