Of the convictions of the lower judgment, the part against Defendant A, C, and E shall be reversed.

Defendant

A, three years of imprisonment,

1. The court below acquitted Defendant A and F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) on the part of travel expenses incurred by Defendant Co., Ltd.’s employees’ participation in the violation of the Medical Devices Act. However, the court below acquitted Defendant Co., Ltd. on this part on the grounds that it found Defendant Co., Ltd. guilty of violating the Medical Devices Act as stated in the same facts charged.

However, in relation to this, the appeal was filed on the ground of mistake of facts as to the violation of the Medical Devices Act which only Defendant A and Defendant Company found guilty, and the prosecutor did not appeal against the acquittal portion on the ground. In such a case, the acquittal portion on the ground is also judged in the trial together with the conviction portion. However, since the acquittal portion on the ground is in fact separated from the object of the attack and defense between the parties, this part cannot be re-determined by the court, since it was excluded from the object of attack

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do5014, Oct. 28, 2004). Therefore, the lower court’s conclusion should be followed with respect to the acquittal portion on the above ground.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

가. 피고인 A, B, C 및 피고인 회사의 주장 (1) 사실오인 내지 법리오해 ㈎ 피고인 A, B은 중고품인 키레이저를 신제품인 것처럼 기망하여 판매하도록 한 사실이 없음에도 원심은 사실을 오인하거나 법리를 오해하여 위 피고인들에 대한 사기의 점을 유죄로 인정하였다.

㈏ 피고인 A과 피고인 회사는 판매 촉진을 목적으로 경제적 이익을 제공한 사실이 없고, 정당한 계약에 따른 의무를 이행하였을 뿐임에도 원심은 사실을 오인하거나 법리를 오해하여 위 피고인들에 대한 의료기기법위반의 점을 유죄로 인정하였다.

In addition, the calculation of economic benefits recognized by the court below was erroneous.

㈐...