2014False 1799 Violation of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act

1. A;

2. 7

Fixed-to-door (Public Trial Acting for Public Prosecutor, Prosecution), Kim Jin-young (Public Trial)

Law Firm Busan, Attorneys Na-soo (For the Defendants)

January 22, 2015

The sentence of punishment against the Defendants shall be suspended separately.

Criminal facts

Defendant A is a person working for a medical institution in charge of the receipt and receipt of patients at the third floor of the building B of the Daejeon Middle-gu, Daejeon. Defendant A is the director who operates the above medical institution.

1. Defendant A

No founder of a medical institution (including employees of the relevant medical institution) shall induce any person who has a prescription to get a preparation of drugs at a specific pharmacy.

On March 26, 2014: around 02, the Defendant prescribed at B, B, and B, B, B, and B, B, B, and B, B, B, B, and B, B, B, B, and B.

Sheet a patient who had been previously placed at a pharmacy? Sheet "we need to be placed at a pharmacy?" "I see "I am at the first floor, ○○ pharmacy." "I am at a pharmacy?" "I am at a pharmacy?" "I am at a solitary? I am there may be no drug "I am at a solitary place".

We will not change. "In response to the change, the act of leading a certain pharmacy to be prepared for a preparation."

2. Defendant B

The defendant, who is an employee, committed a violation as prescribed in paragraph (1) in connection with the defendant's business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Examination of suspect A by the prosecution;

1. Video CDs;

Judgment on Defendant B and Defense Counsel’s argument

1. The assertion;

Defendant A and K in order to prevent such an act of violation by Defendant A.

It was not negligent in giving due attention and reduction, such as occasional education to ensure that a specific pharmacy is not designated and notified to the private company.

2. Determination

According to the Modern, Defendant A asked to the effect that Defendant A would go to the ○○ Contracting State on the first floor without prejudice to the patient's question, which was given a prescription. Even if Defendant B provided education for Defendant A, nurses, etc. to be informed of the designation of a specific pharmacy, it seems that there was no particular effect.

In the end, Defendant B should have been supervised by frequently educating his employees that they should not designate and inform a specific pharmacy, and by clearly notifying them that they may be subject to administrative disposition, such as punishment, suspension of business, etc., and by frequently identifying whether the employees comply with the actual education.

Therefore, it cannot be deemed that Defendant B, who did not so, did not neglect to pay due attention and to prevent the violation. Therefore, the above argument is without merit.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and the selection of punishment for the crime;

Defendant A: Article 94(1)2 of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, Article 24(2)3 of the same Act, the selection of fines

Defendant B: Article 97, Article 94, Article 94 (1) 2, Article 24 (2) 3 of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, Article 24 (2) 1 of the Act, Article 24 (2) 3 of the Act on the Suspension of Sentence

Defendants: Fines 1,00,000

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Defendants: Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (100,000 won per day)

1. Suspension of sentence:

Defendants: Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (the crime of this case is committed by Defendant A and the convenience of his patients

Defendant B appears to have committed an illegal act without any particular awareness of illegality; and Defendant B committed an illegal act.

Although it is not adequate to prevent, it seems that to educate employees to some extent.

Defendant A is the first offender, and Defendant B does not have the same criminal record, and the Defendants make confession.

Since it is against the depth, it is deemed that the circumstances of the dogbry are remarkable.

Judges Lee Jong-ok