Defendant 1 and 10 others

The highest judgment (prosecution) and the public trial

Law Firm Han-dong et al.

Defendant 1 is punished by imprisonment for a period of one year and two months, by imprisonment for a period of ten years, by imprisonment for a period of ten months, by imprisonment for a period of eight months, by imprisonment for a period of eight months, by imprisonment for a period of eight months and by a fine of 115,00,00 won, by imprisonment for a period of eight months and fine of 115,00,000, by a fine of eight months, and by imprisonment for a period of eight months, by imprisonment for a period of eight months, by imprisonment for a period of eight

When Defendant 3 fails to pay the above fine, the above Defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for the period calculated by converting KRW 380,000 into one day.

However, for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, the execution of each of the above imprisonment with labor against Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 6, Defendant 4, Defendant 5, Defendant 8, Defendant 9, Defendant 10, and Defendant 11 is suspended.

Defendant 2 shall be subject to probation and shall be ordered to provide community service for 120 hours.

14,830,00 won shall be additionally collected from Defendant 1.

The provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above additional collection charge shall be ordered to Defendant 1; and the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine shall be ordered to Defendant 3.

1. Joint criminal conduct by Defendants 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 11 [Violation of the Food Sanitation Act and the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act];

A. The Defendants’ status, role, and conspiracy

피고인 1은 2015. 8. 20.경부터 같은 해 10. 22. 10:00경까지 사이에 충남 금산군 (주소 생략)에서 ‘○○○○'라는 상호로 식품소분·판매업, 방문판매업을 영위하는 사람으로서, 인근에 위치한 ‘공소외 1 주식회사’ 제조의 일반식품 ‘천년황칠’을 30ml들이 비닐팩 20포 7,000원, 90포 38,000원, 200포를 90,000원에 각 구입한 후, 위 ‘○○○○’에 홍보관을 설치하고, 그 곳에서 무료관광을 빙자하여 전국 각지로부터 모집한 불특정 노인들을 상대로 위 ‘천년황칠'의 효능을 과장하여 90포 350,000원, 200포 700,000원에 판매하는 속칭 ‘떴다방 영업’을 영위하면서 위 ‘천년황칠’의 공급 및 홍보관 운영 전반을 총괄하였다.

Defendant 2, from August 20, 2015 to October 10:00 of the same year, from October 3, 2015 to October 22, 2010 of the same year, Defendant 3, from October 3, 2015, to October 10:00 of the same month, Defendant 2 took charge of (i) the public relations center, as seen above, of the said “○○○○○”’s effect on the product’s efficacy and effect on the recruited senior citizens at the place, and (ii) took charge of (iii) the advertisement called “instructor” as advertising so as to make it possible for the senior citizens to have the effect on the prevention and treatment of diseases, or to mislead or confuse them with pharmaceutical products or health functional foods.

Defendant 4 and Defendant 5, from August 20, 2015 to October 10, 22, 2010 of the same year, between Defendant 4 and Defendant 5, at the public relations center of the above “○○○○○○”, the said public relations instructors played a role of “sales even” under the title of advertising instructors, which led older persons to purchase the products by cutting the product’s efficacy.

On October 22, 2015, Defendant 11 made an advertisement to make a free tourism to senior citizens residing in (name omitted) who agreed to receive a specified amount of the sales on the phone by making phone calls to Defendant 1 and distribute a specified amount of the sales on the face, and offered them to the public relations center for them, and played a role of getting them to the above “○○○○○”.

B. The Defendants’ co-principal

According to the division of roles above, at around 10:00 on October 22, 2015, Defendant 2 and Defendant 3 expressed that the above "○○○○○○○" promotional center mentioned above, and that the above "○○○" was only a liquid food type, but it is apprehended to mislead the elderly 29 persons, including Nonindicted 3, Nonindicted 2, and Nonindicted 4, who visited the said place, about the food type, to confuse them with the drug or health functional food type. However, even though she takes it, she can put up an open bridge, she can go up with her well-being her hand, her hand, her hand, and her hand, she can put a food to a very small-scale baby, and she can bring about her hand among her children, and she can bring about a little amount of efficacy than her ginseng, and she is likely to confuse them with the drug or health functional food product with the effect of preventing and treating various diseases or to sell them.

On the other hand, Defendant 4 and Defendant 5, a sales-free shop, directed senior citizens so that they can easily hear the lectures of promotion instructors, and continuously stressed the lecture on the above "Yacheon" after the lecture, thereby leading senior citizens to purchase their products without fail.

In addition, Defendant 1 took overall charge of the above-mentioned activities by ordering public relations instructors, sales helpers, etc.

Defendant 11 has recruited about 29 senior citizens residing in (name omitted) under the pretext of free-of-charge tourism, and served on (vehicle registration number omitted) △△ Tourist Bus operated by Nonindicted 5, thereby leading to the public relations center for the above “○○○○○”.

As a result, Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 3, Defendant 4, Defendant 5, and Defendant 11 conspired with each other in sequentially selling Nonindicted 2 with the said “Mullty” in order, thereby advertising to customers in such a way as above, with the content that it might have efficacy and effect in preventing and treating diseases, or be mistaken or confused with medicine or health functional foods, and selling a product “Mullty” worth KRW 114,830,00,00 in total, by advertising with the content that is likely to mislead customers as having medical efficacy and effect.

2. Joint criminal acts by Defendants 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 (violation of the Functional Health Foods Act and Pharmaceutical Affairs Act)

A. The Defendants’ status, role, and conspiracy

피고인 6은 2015. 7. 15.경부터 같은 해 10. 22.경까지 사이에 충남 금산군 (주소 2 생략)에서 ‘□□□□□□□'라는 상호로 건강기능식품판매업을 영위하는 사람으로서, ‘◇◇제약’ 제조의 건강기능식품 ‘닥터 건강플러스’ 1박스를 100,000원에 구입한 후, 위 ‘□□□□□□□’에 홍보관을 설치하고, 그 곳에서 무료관광을 빙자하여 전국 각지로부터 모집한 불특정 노인들을 상대로 위 ‘닥터 건강플러스'의 효능을 과장하여 원래 판매가의 3배인 1박스에 300,000원으로 판매하는 속칭 ‘떴다방 영업’을 영위하면서, 위 ‘닥터 건강플러스'의 공급 및 홍보관 운영 전반을 총괄하였다.

Defendant 7, from October 19, 2015 to 13:10 on October 22, 2010 of the same month, had a strong intent to the effect and effect of the above “Culter Health Pulter” product that sold to the senior citizens recruited as above, and had been in charge of the advertisement so that the said “Culter Health Pulter” was capable of having the effect of preventing and treating diseases, or that it could be mistaken or confused as medicine.

From July 15, 2015 to October 13:10 of the same year, Defendant 8, Defendant 9, and Defendant 10 play a role in the Public Relations Center of △△△ Dol (hereinafter referred to as the “Sengsan Dol”), as seen above, in terms of the public relations instructor’s lectures, the public relations instructor played a role in purchasing the products by impairing the efficacy of the products against the elderly.

On October 22, 2015, Defendant 11: (a) made an advertisement with Defendant 6 to have a certain amount of sales on a face-to-face by making phone calls to Defendant 6, and to have the aged living in (name omitted) participate in free tourism; (b) recruited customers; and (c) played a role of bringing them to the above “△△△” public relations officer.

B. The Defendants’ co-principal

According to such division of roles as above, Defendant 7, at the public relations center of △△ City around October 22, 2015, up to the above period of time, on the following purport: (a) Defendant 7: (b) was a health functional food for senior citizens, including Nonindicted 3, Nonindicted 2, and Nonindicted 4, who visited the place; and (c) was sold at the place to 29 senior citizens, including Nonindicted 3, Nonindicted 2, and Nonindicted 4, who visited the place; and (c) was likely to mislead and confuse the product with the efficacy and effect of the drug, which is not a medicine, because the product contains various quality ingredients, such as me-3.

On the other hand, Defendant 8, Defendant 9, and Defendant 10, who are the sales helper, directed senior citizens so that they can easily hear the lectures of promotion instructors, and continuously stressed the lecture on the above "Matter Health Plus" after the demotion, thereby leading senior citizens to purchase their products without fail.

In addition, Defendant 6 took overall control of the foregoing work by ordering the public relations instructors, the sales helpers, etc.

Defendant 11 has recruited about 29 senior citizens residing in (name omitted) under the pretext of free-of-charge tourism, and served on (vehicle registration number omitted) △△ Tourist Bus operated by Nonindicted 5, and has been going to the public relations center for △△△△△△△.

As a result, Defendant 6, Defendant 7, Defendant 8, Defendant 9, Defendant 10, and Defendant 11 conspired with each other for each of the above participation periods, and advertised Non-Party 3 with the contents that are likely to have efficacy and effect in preventing and treating diseases, or to mislead and confuse them as medicine, such as selling “culp health displayer” at KRW 300,00 by the said method, and selling “culp health displayer” products totaling KRW 52,986,00,00, which are likely to have medical efficacy and effect.

Facts No. 1

1. Each legal statement of Defendants 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 11

1. Each police protocol on Nonindicted 3, Nonindicted 2, Nonindicted 4, and Nonindicted 5

1. Report on internal investigation (related to field confirmation) and investigation report (amount and number of victims of the crime);

1. Prior notice of a copy of the product purchase contract, a business notification certificate (○○○), a copy of Nonindicted Co. 1’s business registration certificate, a copy of the sales unit price table of the astronomical Yellow Sea Products, a comparison (ju △△△△△ Tourism), the details of sales of the ○○○ credit card, an organization, two copies of the product purchase contract, a report on the food and drug safety place, and a white paper on the luc

1. On-site photographs;

Facts of Decision 2

1. Each legal statement of the defendant 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11

1. Each police statement on Nonindicted 3, Nonindicted 4, and Nonindicted 5

1. A report on internal investigation (related to the recovery of Nonindicted 3’s health fluor products), investigation report (the amount of crime damage and the number of victims);

1. A copy of the product purchase contract, a business report certificate, a credit card sales statement, Defendant 6 ACF, a copy of the product purchase contract, two copies of the organization, and a report on the food and drugs safety;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Relevant legal principles concerning facts constituting the crime;

A. Defendants 1, 2, 4, and 5 each inclusive: Articles 94(1)2 and 13(1)1 of the Food Sanitation Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act; Articles 93(1)10 and 61(2) of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act

B. Defendant 3: Each inclusive: Articles 94(2) and 94(1)2-2, 13(1)1, and 94(3) of the Food Sanitation Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act; Articles 93(1)10 and 61(2) of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act

C. Defendants 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10: Comprehensively cover each of them, Articles 43(1)2 and 18(1)1 of the Health Functional Foods Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act; Articles 93(1)10 and 61(2) of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act

D. Defendant 11: As a whole, Articles 94(1)2 and 13(1)1 of the Food Sanitation Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Articles 43(1)2 and 18(1)1 of the Health Functional Foods Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Articles 93(1)10 and 61(2) of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Articles 93(1)10 and 61(2) of the same Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act

1. Selection of punishment;

A. Defendant 3’s violation of the Food Sanitation Act: Imprisonment with prison labor and a fine concurrently as necessary

(b) The remainder of each crime: Selection of each imprisonment with labor;

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes (defendants);

A. Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 3, Defendant 4, and Defendant 5: The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38(1)2, and 50 of the Criminal Act [aggravating concurrent crimes to the punishment prescribed for a crime of violating the Food Sanitation Act with heavier punishment (in the case of Defendant 3, imprisonment with prison labor)];

B. Defendant 6, Defendant 7, Defendant 8, Defendant 9, and Defendant 10: The former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of concurrent crimes with punishment stipulated in the Act on the Punishment of Health Functional Foods with Heavy Punishment)

(c) Defendant 11: The former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of concurrent crimes with the punishment prescribed for a crime of violating the Food Sanitation Act of the largest penalty and the nature of the crime)

1. Discretionary mitigation (Defendant 3);

Articles 53, 55(1)3, and 6 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Articles 55(1)3 and 55(1)6)

1. Detention in a workhouse (Defendant 3);

Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution (defendants 1, 2, 6, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, and 11);

Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Code (Resumed Circumstances with Respect to Reasons for Sentencing below)

1. Probation and community service order (Defendant 2);

Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

1. Collection (Defendant 1);

Articles 10(1) and 8(1) of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment

1. Order to make provisional payment (defendants 1 and 3);

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The scope of punishment by law;

A. Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 4, Defendant 5, Defendant 6, Defendant 7, Defendant 8, Defendant 9, Defendant 10, and Defendant 11: Imprisonment with labor for not more than 15 years

(b) Defendant 3: Imprisonment for six months to five years, and fine for 110,088,180 won to 1) for 275,220,450 won

2. Scope of recommendations according to the sentencing criteria;

A. Defendants (excluding Defendants 3 and 11)

1) Basic crime: Violation of the Food Sanitation Act (defendants 1, 2, 4, and 5), and violation of the Health Functional Foods Act (defendants 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10)

[Determination of Types] Types 2 (General Types) of the Specialized Food and Health Labels>

【Special Convicted Person】

[Scope of Recommendation] Ten months to two years of imprisonment

2. Second offense: Violation of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act;

same as the scope of recommendations for basic crimes;

3) Many crimes: Imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months to 3 years (=the upper limit of basic crimes + the upper limit of primary crimes 1/2)

B. Defendant 3

1) Basic crimes: Offenses of the Food Sanitation Act;

[Determination of Types] Types 2 (General Types) of the Specialized Food and Health Labels>

【Special Convicts】 Not more than five years of re-offenders

[Scope of Recommendation] Imprisonment of 1 year and 6 months to 3 years and 6 months (Aggravation)

2. Second offense: Violation of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act;

[Determination of Types] Types 2 (General Types) of the Specialized Food and Health Labels>

【Special Convicted Person】

[Scope of Recommendation] Ten months to two years of imprisonment

3) Handling multiple crimes: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months to four years: (i) the upper limit of the basic crime + the upper limit of the first crime 1/2)

C. Defendant 11

1) Basic crimes: Offenses of the Food Sanitation Act;

2. Second offense: Violation of the Health Foods Act;

3) Second offense: Violation of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act;

All the remaining Defendants (other than Defendant 3) are the same as the recommended range of punishment for basic crimes (a).

4) Handling multiple crimes: Imprisonment of 10 months to 3 years (basic crime maximum + 1/2 of the upper limit of primary crime + 1/3 of the upper limit of secondary crime).

3. Determination of sentence;

Defendant 1 and Defendant 6 stated that the Defendants would not commit any crime of this case again and they would not commit such a crime again; the period of the crime is about 2-3 months and less than the amount of sales volume; Defendant 1 did not have been punished for the same kind of crime; Defendant 3 and Defendant 7 are the first offender; Defendant 3 were less than 20 days; Defendant 7 was relatively short of 3 days; Defendant 4, Defendant 5, Defendant 8, Defendant 9, and Defendant 10 were in charge of the sales of “Murlurl” or “Mulbr” and did not have much degree of participation in this case.

However, in the instant case, the Defendants were sentenced to the suspended sentence of imprisonment with labor for not less than 2 years, 2 years, 3 years, 2 years, 3 years, 3 years, 3 years, 3 years, 4, 7, 8, 9, and 10 years, 3 years, 3 years, 4 years, 4 years, 7, 8, 9, and 10 were sentenced to a fine for a violation of the Food Sanitation Act, despite the fact that the Defendants were sentenced to a fine for a violation of the Food Sanitation Act, etc., the Defendants were inevitable during the suspended sentence of execution, and the rest of the Defendants were subject to a punishment for the crime of this case, and they did not have been punished for the crime of this case. In full view of the above facts, even if the Defendants were to have been punished for the crime of violating the Food Sanitation Act, they did not have any inevitable circumstances against the majority of the Defendants, such as the crime of this case.

In addition, taking into account all the circumstances prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, Defendant 1, Defendant 2, and Defendant 6 shall determine the punishment as set forth in the respective orders within the scope of the sentencing guidelines and suspend the execution of the punishment. Defendant 3, Defendant 4, Defendant 5, Defendant 7, Defendant 8, Defendant 9, Defendant 10, and Defendant 11 shall be subject to suspension of the execution of the punishment as set forth in the respective orders, beyond the scope of the sentencing guidelines.

Judges Lee Sung-sung (Presiding Judge)

1) A prosecutor appears to have provided a fine of KRW 130,00,00 for Defendant 3 with a discretionary mitigation of the sales amount of KRW 60,548,50 for October 2015 (Evidence No. 107 of the record). However, Defendant 3 participated in the crime from October 3, 2015 to October 22, 2015, the arrested seal of KRW 55,04,090 for the period during which Defendant 3 participated x 60,548,50 x 20 days (Evidence No. 3, October 3, 2015 to October 22, 2015) / (except for the sales amount of KRW 130,000 from October 3, 2015 to October 22, 2015, the sales amount of KRW 55,04,090 from October 22, 2015 to October 25, 2015).