beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.
When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
No one shall put a mark on an outer package or an accompanying document of an appliance, other than a medical device, that is likely to mislead any person to believe that it has a performance, efficacy, effect, etc. similar to that of a medical device, or place an advertisement with such misleading contents, or sell, lease, store, or display for the purpose of selling, selling, or leasing, an appliance marked or advertised as such, the Defendant may assist not only the improvement of the blood cycle, but also the creation of hmon by directly stimulateing the hon that is marked or advertised on January 9, 2015 and January 10, 2015.
There are various kinds of lands, such as the vicinity of the pelle body and the vicinity of the old sea body, and it is also helpful to mash this part in the common sense.
It is naturally helpful to improve the strength of electric power by pre-agnating wire, high blood pressure, / flaging drug, and helgel's movement.
“.......”
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. A E-document;
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on accusation and newspaper advertisement;
1. Article 52 (1) 1 of the Medical Devices Act and Article 26 (7) of the same Act concerning facts constituting a crime (excluding punishment)
1. A fine of KRW 500,000 [former summary - KRW 500,00] sentenced to the sentence] was again discovered for the same crime, taking into account the following: (a) the Defendant, like the instant case on May 21, 2014, placed an advertisement to the effect that “the Defendant has a male sexual function improvement effect on three kinds of medical devices, such as D,” was subject to the Suspension of Indictment Act as a violation of the Medical Devices Act; (b) the reason for the disposition was as follows: (c) the Defendant has no same power; (d) the Defendant has been aged 76 years old; and (e) the Defendant has suspended sales after the enforcement. Therefore, there is doubt as to whether the Defendant’s mistake at the time was genuinely against the Defendant, and ultimately