본문 바로가기 주메뉴로 바로가기
All
TITLE 【Syllabus of Latest Opinion】Supreme Court en banc Decision 2017Do16593-1 Decided March 21, 2019 【Violation of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act】 [full Text]
Summary
[1] Purport and basis of the so-called “legal principle regarding the restriction on grounds for final appeal”
Whether the court of final appeal should only examine the reasonableness of the matters that had been subject to the adjudication of the appellate court within the scope of grounds for final appeal (affirmative), and in a case where subjecting matters other than what was argued by the appellant as the grounds for appeal, or what was adjudicated ex officio by the appellate court to the adjudication of the court of final appeal goes against the ex post facto review structure adopted by the court of final appeal (affirmative)
In a case where: (a) the Defendant did not appeal the first instance judgment by which the Defendant was found guilty, or appealed on the sole ground of an unreasonable sentencing decision; (b) the Prosecutor lodged an appeal on the ground of an unreasonable sentencing decision; (c) the appellate court granted the Prosecutor’s appeal, reversed the first instance judgment, and imposed a higher sentence, whether it is justifiable for the Defendant to lodge a final appeal citing the new grounds for final appeal, for example, violation of law, which had not been subject to the appellate court’s adjudication (negative)
[2] In a case where: (a) the Defendants were indicted on a charge of violating the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, and sentenced to a fine by the first instance court; (b) the Defendants either did not lodge an appeal or appealed on the sole ground of an unreasonable sentencing decision; (c) the Prosecutor also appealed the ruling on the ground of an unreasonable sentencing decision; (d) the appellate court accepted the Prosecutor’s ground for appeal, reversed the first instance judgment, and imposed a higher sentence on each of the Defendants; (e) the Defendants raised new grounds for final appeal that had not been subject to the review of the court of appeals, including (i) violating the rules of admissibility of evidence, (ii) failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, and (iii) misapprehending legal principles, the case holding that the foregoing grounds for final appeal presented by the Defendants are invalid grounds for final appeal as they had not been subject to the review in the appellate trial
Prev
Next 【Syllabus of Latest Opinion】Supreme Court en banc Order 2015Mo2229 Dated March 21, 2019【Reappeal against Decision on Commencement of a New Trial】
219 Seocho-ro,Seocho-gu,Seoul 06590,Republic of Korea 02-3480-1100