We reverse the judgment of the court below.

Defendant

Punishments for A, G, andY shall be determined by two years of imprisonment.

Defendant

AZ.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1 (the violation of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act with respect to G and AY among the judgment below of the court below of Korea) is a loan of KRW 1.5 billion paid by the Defendant to G and AY not for the adoption of medicine and maintenance of transaction.

2) The lower court’s sentence that is unfair in sentencing (with respect to all of the lower judgment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant G and AY1) The amount of KRW 1.5 billion received by the Defendants misunderstanding the facts as A is not a consideration for the adoption of medicine and the maintenance of transaction.

2) The punishment of the 2nd judgment decision that was unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

(c)

Defendant

AZ1) Taking into account the following: (a) the method of the payment of rebates for misunderstanding of fact is different from the method of payment to different doctors; (b) the statement on the place of the offering of rebates is inconsistent with objective facts; (c) the difference between the amount made by the offering of rebates as a means of rebates; (d) the amount made from the account in the name of C in the name of the company A; (c) the total amount of the amount of the prescription written by a pharmacist as stated in the Dualian is different from the amount of the prescription written by a pharmacist submitted by the Defendant; and (d) the fact that the details different from the calendar in relation to other cases are false, the lower court erred by misapprehending the Defendant’s statement, calendar, and multilateral, which did not have been trusted, even though the Defendant did not have received rebates as stated in the instant

2) The punishment of the 2nd judgment decision that was unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

(d)

1) According to the evidence submitted by the lower court, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the charge of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) despite all of the facts charged, based on the misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (the part of the lower judgment’s 2nd non-guilty of Defendant G, AY, BB).

2) The 2nd judgment decision of the court below (as to Defendant G, Y, and AZ)’s unfair sentencing (as to Defendant G, AY, and AZ), is deemed too unhued and unfair.

2...