beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is that G and I’s statements concerning the facts charged of this case are inconsistent.
However, it is reasonable to view that it was against the empirical rule to make the first detailed statement about the details of rebates between several years for a pharmaceutical company to which the pharmaceutical company belongs when it was investigated as a suspicion of rebates, and that it was more clearly stated in the Defendant’s details of rebates in the process of receiving in-depth investigations after being provided by an investigative agency with the credit card settlement details and being provided by the investigative agency. Therefore, the lower court rejected the credibility of the statement made G and I and found the Defendant not guilty of the instant facts charged, and thus, it is unlawful.
2. Determination
A. The lower court determined that the instant facts charged were proven without reasonable doubt, based on the evidence presented by the prosecutor, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence presented by the lower court.
The lower court acquitted the Defendant on the ground that it was insufficient to view.
① With respect to the portion of cash payment of the rebates as indicated in the facts charged of the instant case, G and I’s statements were presented as evidence corresponding thereto; however, their statements were made from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court’s judgment on the rate of rebates, the timing and amount of rebates payment, and the financial resources of the amount paid, etc.; G made a statement at the court of the lower court that “it is not accurate memory to which of the 50 hospitals managing the money left from the head office or the corporate card and delivered the merchandise coupon in cash,” in light of the following: (a) it is difficult to believe their statements as they are.
② With respect to the payment portion of the rebates as indicated in the facts charged of the instant case, G is equivalent to a certain percentage of the prescribed amount of pharmaceutical drugs for which rebates was established F (hereinafter “F”).