Supreme Court Decision 2020Do18062 Decided May 12, 2022 【Violation of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act】

【Main Issues and Holdings】
[1] Legislative intention of Article 47(1)4 Item (b) of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act and Article 44(1)2 of the Enforcement Rules of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act and the meaning of “intent” in the crime of violating the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act by solicitation, etc. of customers
[2] In the case where the Defendants, founders of pharmacies, were indicted on the charge of violating the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act through unfair solicitation of customers and patients by having colluded to employ joint attendants for all of the member pharmacies to which the Defendants belonged, and made the said joint attendants approach patients near hospitals who had not yet determined which pharmacies to go and escort the patients to member pharmacies in a predetermined order by offering free rides, the case holding that there is a high chance that the Defendants acknowledged that the above act of guiding the patients, etc. constituted a prohibited act of solicitation of customers under the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act