The judgment below

The part of the defendant D against the defendant is reversed.

Defendant

D. A person shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of two years.

except that this judgment.

1. The lower court determined that among the charges against Defendant B, Defendant B, Defendant B was not a pharmacist, the part of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, which was established between July 21, 2012 and July 8, 2013, was committed in collusion with Defendant B, and that Defendant B, in collusion with Defendant B and with the National Health Insurance Corporation, enticed the victims of the National Health Insurance Corporation, thereby deceiving the victims, thereby receiving the payment of the medical care benefit cost under the name of the medical care benefit cost (Fraud) between August 28, 2012 and July 12, 2013, the lower court acquitted Defendant B of each of the facts constituting the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), which is related to each of the aforementioned acquitted parts.

(b) Violation of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act and No. 1-2

As long as it is found guilty of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), it was judged that the defendant was not guilty separately in the disposition.

Accordingly, only Defendant B filed an appeal against the guilty portion, and the prosecutor did not file an appeal. In such a case, according to the principle of no appeal, the acquittal portion for each of the above reasons is also transferred to the court, along with the guilty portion. However, this part has already been relieved of the object of trial from the object of attack and defense between the parties, and thus, this part cannot be re-determined by the court.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2004Do5014, Oct. 28, 2004; 2009Do12934, Jan. 14, 2010). Therefore, since the scope of trial on Defendant B is limited to the part that the lower court found guilty, the lower court’s conclusion is followed with respect to each of the aforementioned parts of acquittal for the above reasons, and this court does not re-determine.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles ) The Defendant entered into a joint agreement with C, a pharmacist, with respect to L Pharmacy, and made an investment accordingly.