All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) Defendant A sold the drug in accordance with the pharmaceutical J’s instruction.

Even if it is not recognized that there was an explicit instruction of the above pharmacist, four pharmacists were working for the above pharmacy at the time, and Defendant B, a pharmacist, was confirmed to be calculated in the account book, and it is reasonable to view that he sold drugs in accordance with a pharmacist’s implied or presumed instruction.

2. According to the facts and circumstances found by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the following circumstances, namely, “violation video CD,” which are acknowledged by the above evidence, Defendant A sent a card and receipt to the reporter, and again presented on the screen the reporter the card and receipt. After entering the amount into the card device, Defendant B’s rear her back travel to the top of the line on which Defendant A was displayed. However, Defendant B’s rear her back movement to Defendant A had a sound of which the amount was already input, and Defendant B followed the side of the line displayed without Defendant’s implied consent, in light of the fact that Defendant A’s immediately expressed on the screen, he could not be seen as having given that Defendant A’s pharmacist’s consent as well as the pharmaceutical pharmacist’s consent was insufficient.

Therefore, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of misconception of facts alleged by the defendants.

3. In conclusion, the defendants' appeal is without merit and Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.