The defendant is innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is the president of the division within D.

On July 1, 2011, the Defendant received 3.6 million won from G to one bank account in the name of the Defendant, which requested F to pay rebates to its doctors at the medical staff located in Pyeongtaek-si E.

As a result, the Defendant was provided with economic benefits for the purpose of promoting sales such as adoption of medicine as medical personnel.

2. Determination

1. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is that the Defendant received KRW 3.6 million in return for “after-marketing investigation” permitted under the Medical Service Act, and the Defendant did not receive the said money under the pretext of the so-called rebates.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence adopted and examined by this court, it is evident that F was planned to offer rebates to doctors in a way that does not legally problematic, through G, in order to offer rebates to doctors. From the perspective of F’s 3.6 million won, it is evident that F was provided to the Defendant for the purpose of sales promotion, such as inducing F to adopt prescriptions on medicines manufactured by it.

B. However, in light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted and examined by the court as to whether the Defendant received the said KRW 3.6 million with knowledge of the so-called rebates offered for the purpose of sales promotion, the evidence alone submitted by the prosecutor alone was proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the instant facts charged.

It is difficult to see it.

① The business employees of the F Gyeonggi District Head Team directly commissioned the Defendant to engage in the instant bookbook from the I, the head of the Suwon Team, entered into an entrustment contract for the “after-marketing investigation” through G. As such, the I, who was the head of the Suwon Team, was ordered to request the physician to conduct an investigation after the market. The purport is that he/she was unaware of the so-called rebates that he/she would be the so-called “after-marketing investigation.”