The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a pharmacist who operates a pharmacy in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D3.

At around 11:30 on April 2, 2015, the Defendant: (a) prepared medicines with a prescription issued by the victim F (n, 73 years of age) from G and doctor H for the victim under the A-ray treatment; (b) neglected the duty of care to confirm that all the drugs specified in the prescription include the drugs, so as not to cause adverse effects to the victim; (c) neglected to perform the duty of care to prevent adverse effects on the victim; (d) even though the above prescription was written in 2 '0.1mg' of the A-ray treatment medicine, it was written in 10,00,000, which made 10,000 g "0.1mg of the 0.1mg of the A-ray treatment day" for more than six months; and (e) caused injury to the victim, who took advantage of a medicine prepared in 10,000 won of the A-ray treatment day, caused the symptoms to the A-ray treatment day

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of suspect interrogation of the accused;

1. Application of F-related Acts and subordinate statutes to police statements (attached documents);

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Selection of Penalty for the Crime. Article 268 (Selection of Fine)

1. Penalty fine of KRW 3,000,000 to be suspended;

1. Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act for the inducement of a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Code of the Suspension of Sentence (referring to the following reasons for sentencing) guilty and the reason for sentencing cannot be deemed to have mistakenly prepared a drug for six months only by the victim’s paper. Even if such was lost, it cannot be deemed that the victim’s health condition was impeded.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by each evidence of the judgment, namely, the victim's inquiry that the Defendant's prepared a drug on October 6, 2015 differs from the existing medicine that had been imprisoned for six months from the following day, and the Defendant's confirmation at the hospital verified that the Defendant's 2 notice was prescribed more than the previous prescription, and confirmed the victim's and his family members' mistake.