1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The Plaintiffs are the subscribers of the National Health Insurance, who purchased drugs manufactured and sold by the Defendant, as seen below. 2) The Defendant is a business operator manufacturing and selling drugs, and is a business operator under Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act (hereinafter “Fair Trade Act”).

B. The Defendant’s unfair customer inducement act: (a) accumulated 10% of the hospital sales revenue as U-code with respect to C hospitals that prescribe 15 drugs, including “Abn”, “finenenenenenenenen”, “Poline”, and “general water”, and (b) commercialized it and provided cash and donations around September 2004; (c) provided goods such as hospital expenses, subsidies for transportation expenses; (d) provided goods such as hospital expenses; (e) provided entertainment and entertainment expenses; (e) provided entertainment tickets; (e) provided school expenses; (e) provided school expenses; (f) provided school expenses; (f) provided school expenses; (f) provided school expenses; (f) provided support through survey after the market; and (f) provided support to customers under the Fair Trade Act, such as donations.

C. 1) The Fair Trade Commission imposed penalty surcharges on the Defendant. The Defendant determined that the Defendant’s act of attracting unfair customers under Article 23(1)3 of the Fair Trade Act constitutes one of the following acts: (a) under the plan at the head office, the Defendant continuously provided cash and donations to medical workers, such as medical doctors, etc. for a period from January 2004 to September 2006; (b) provided goods such as hospital expenses, etc.; (c) provided goods such as medicine transport expenses; (d) provided goods such as hospital expenses, etc.; (d) provided goods such as discount; (e) provided goods with golf and meal services; (e) provided entertainment expenses; (e) provided entertainment expenses; (g) provided entertainment expenses; (g) provided school conference support; (g) provided donation support; and (g) provided donation support through post-market research; and (g) comprehensively determined that the Defendant’s act of attracting more customers under the plan at the seat of the head office; and (g) imposed penalty surcharges of KRW 3,203,000,00.