Text
All appeals are dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).
1. The lower court found Defendant A, B, C, F, and G’s grounds of appeal on grounds of appeal, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, it convicted Defendant A, B, C, F, and G of the facts charged (excluding the part not guilty of Defendant A and F).
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not exhaust all necessary deliberations, and did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding “sales promotion”, “prohibited economic benefits”, “importers,” etc. in violation of the Medical Devices Act, and omitting judgment.
2. The lower court found Defendant D limited liability company guilty of the facts charged (excluding the part not guilty in the grounds of appeal) against Defendant D limited liability company on the grounds stated in its reasoning.
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules without exhaust all necessary deliberations, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “prohibited provision of economic benefits” in the crime of violation of the Medical Devices Act, and “importers,” etc.
3. The lower court found Defendant E guilty of the facts charged (excluding the part not guilty in the grounds of appeal) on the grounds stated in its reasoning.
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court erred by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “prohibited act of offering economic benefits” in violation of the Medical Devices Act, and omitting judgment.