Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for four months, by a fine of three thousand won,00,000 won, respectively.

Defendant

B The above fine.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B is a pharmacist who operates the “E pharmacy” located in Jeonju-si, Jeonju-si D, and Defendant A is an employee of the said E pharmacy, who is not a pharmacist.

1. No person, other than Defendant A pharmacy founders, may sell medicines;

Nevertheless, around 12:50 on August 27, 2014, the Defendant: (a) sold F, who visited the above pharmacy, after receiving KRW 8,000 as an over-the-counter medicine, to F, who visited the above pharmacy, even though it is not a pharmacist.

2. Defendant A, an employee of Defendant B, committed the above violation in relation to the Defendant’s duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each legal statement of witness F and G;

1. Each legal statement of a witness A and B;

1. G statements;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the written accusation;

1. Article 93(1)7 and Article 44(1)4(1)2 of the former Pharmaceutical Affairs Act (Amended by Act No. 13114, Jan. 28, 2015; hereinafter the same shall apply): Defendant B: Articles 97, 93(1)7 and 44(1)4 of the former Pharmaceutical Affairs Act;

1. Defendant B of detention in a workhouse: Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant A who is subject to suspended execution: Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as “Chocks favorable to the following sentencing grounds”);

1. Defendant A of a community service order: Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc.;

1. Defendant B of the provisional payment order: Determination on the Defendants and defense counsel’ assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the assertion is that Defendant A, a pharmacist, asked Defendant B whether the instant over-the-counter drugs was sold or not, and thereafter, sold the “sylon” according to Defendant B’s instructions, and the Defendants are not guilty.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the court’s duly adopted and investigated evidence, i.e., the purchaser of the instant drug, who purchased the instant drug, and F, a whistleblower, went to E pharmacy prior to the instant date in this Court.