Cases where the value stipulated in Article 3 (1) 1 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes is at least one million won per year and a comprehensive one crime;

As long as the Defendant is subject to a blanket offense with respect to the drugs illegally manufactured throughout the period from 1972 to 1979, there was a time when the annual retail price during that period falls short of one million won and exceeds one million won, the Defendant did not err by applying Article 3(1)3 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes to the Defendant.

Article 3 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes

Defendant

Attorney Ba-ho et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 79No1031 delivered on November 15, 1979

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal by defense counsel are examined.

In full view of each lawful evidence of the court of first instance cited by the court below, in particular, from July 1, 1972 to April 10, 1979, the defendant stated that he illegally manufactured 645 Do Do Do 645 Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do 15,000 to 25,00 Do 15,000 Do Do 15,00 Do Do 15,000 Do Do 15, and Do Do Do 1800 Do Do 1800 per 1 year, the court below stated that the defendant sold the Do Do Do 180,000 Do Do 15,000 Do Do 15, which was declared by the court of first instance. Thus, the court below cannot be deemed to have sufficiently recognized the criminal facts of this case including the quantity of illegally produced medicines that the court below recognized against the defendant or its retail price.

In addition, the court below is clear in the record that the defendant is punished as a comprehensive crime against the defendant with respect to the drug of this case manufactured illegally throughout the period from 1972 to 1979. Thus, even if the annual retail price falls short of one million won under the provision of Article 3 (1) 1 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes, in this case where the annual retail price from 1977 to 1979 exceeds one million won each year, the court below should not have an influence on the application of the above provision of this Act to the defendant, so there is no error of incomplete deliberation or application of law.

In sum, this paper argues that the court below's exclusive authority over the preparation of evidence would be denied part of the facts of crime without the reason, or if so, it would not be justified in this case, and further, it cannot be adopted by attacking the judgment of the court below for an independent reason different from the legal opinion of the court below.

Therefore, this appeal is without merit and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Dra-ro (Presiding Justice)