All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A’s misunderstanding of the facts reveals the fact that Defendant A received a total of KRW 3 million from H business employees I and J from August 201 to May 2014 in return for the prescription of H medicines. However, Defendant A received a total of KRW 7,120,000,000 as stated in the instant facts charged, as indicated in the instant facts charged.

(2) The sentence against Defendant A, who is unfair in sentencing (hereinafter referred to as 3,00,000 won) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B’s misunderstanding of the facts as follows: (a) Defendant B received KRW 2.5 million in total from H business employees I for every three months; (b) but there was no fact that Defendant B received KRW 7.620,000 in total in return for the prescription of H drugs, as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

(2) The sentence against Defendant B, who is unfair in sentencing (hereinafter 5,00,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment as to the Defendants’ assertion of mistake of facts and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the Defendants’ acceptance of cash provided by I and J for the purpose of sales promotion, such as inducing the adoption of medicine, as stated in the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment, can be sufficiently recognized. Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion of mistake is without merit.

(1) Each amount of receiving each of the facts charged in the instant case is based on the “the details of rebates paid to each business employee at H”. This is, after completing the internal review of the company’s amount of rebates, etc. requested by the business employee, based on the content of H database (DB) that was entirely reflected and stored until the representative director’s approval, and thus, it is difficult to readily dismiss the credibility of the said details of rebates.

(2) The I and J, a business employee of H, delivered cash in the name of rebates to the Defendants from the investigative agency to the lower court’s court, as stated in the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment.