1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the underlying facts is as follows: “The date of February 2, 2013” in Part 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the corresponding part of the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance except for the dismissal of the person as of February 2, 2013, and thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The seller of the pertinent drug is not E but D with the qualifications of pharmacist. However, since D was a physically handicapped person aged 75 years old, and it was inconvenient, E employed in the form of Aarba. Therefore, the instant disposition was unlawful for the reason that E was sold. (ii) Even if the seller of the instant drug, the purpose of Article 44(1) of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, which was in force at the time of the act of selling the instant drug, is to prohibit “the act of selling medicines at a place other than a pharmacy,” and “the act of selling medicines at a pharmacy, other than a pharmacist,” does not prohibit “the act of selling medicines at a pharmacy, other than a pharmacist,” and Article 96(3) of the Enforcement Rule of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, which is delegated with the criteria for administrative disposition to determine the criteria for violating the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act pursuant to Article 76(3) of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act.

Ⅱ Standard No. 11 (hereinafter referred to as “instant administrative disposition criteria”) provides that a certain administrative disposition shall be taken, without delegation of the parent law, by “where a pharmacy sells drugs to a person who is not a pharmacist,” i.e., a person who is not a pharmacist.

Therefore, the administrative disposition criteria of this case exceeded the limit of delegated legislation, and thus, the disposition of this case is also unlawful.

3. "Where a pharmacy sells drugs to an employee, etc. who is not a pharmacist", which is a violation set forth in the administrative disposition guidelines of this case, means all a series of sales activities such as recommendation of drugs, delivery of drugs, guidance on taking medicines, and settlement of payments.