Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

If the Defendants did not pay each of the above fines, 50.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is an employee of the management of the “E-Contracting” in Cheongju-si, Chungcheongnam-si, and Defendant B is a pharmacist who opened and operated the above E-Contracting on December 26, 2006.

Any person other than a pharmacy founder (including a pharmacist or herb doctor working for the relevant pharmacy) shall be prohibited from selling drugs.

1. Nevertheless, around November 1, 2012, Defendant A sold 3,000 won an over-the-counter medication to customers, even if a pharmacy founder or a pharmacist is not a pharmacy founder or a pharmacist.

2. Defendant B sold over-the-counter drugs to Defendant A, who is an employee of the Defendant, even though he was not a pharmacy founder or a pharmacist as above in relation to the Defendant’s business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ partial statement

1. Accusation against a violator of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act;

1. A statement prepared by the F;

1. Application of the video CD-related Acts and subordinate statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

(a) Defendant A: Article 93 (1) 7 and Article 44 (1) of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act (Selection of Fines);

(b) Defendant B: Articles 97, 93(1)7, and 44(1) of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act (Selection of Fines);

1. Defendants to be detained in a workhouse: Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Defendant A, the asserted employee, was a pharmacist’s wife, and Defendant B, as the wife of Defendant B, sold two-way sprinks to customers in accordance with the implied direction of the above G G while Defendant B, a pharmacist, prepared a drug in the above pharmacy dispensary, and Defendant B, a pharmacist, sold his assistant by mechanical or physical use. As such, it is reasonable to legally evaluate that the pharmacist sold his/her assistant by using a mechanical or physical method.

2. However, the G was in the above pharmacy dispensary.

Even if there is no evidence to prove that the sales of the drug of this case was specifically and individually ordered by the employee.