본문 바로가기 주메뉴로 바로가기
All
TITLE 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 the grounds for final appeal”
Whether the court of final appeal shall only examine the reasonableness of the matters that had been subject to adjudication of the appellate court within the scope of grounds for final appeal (affirmative), and in a case where the grounds for final appeal include: (a) matters that were not argued by the appellant as the grounds for appeal; or (b) matters determined by the appellate court’s ex officio designation as the subject of adjudication, whether including such matters in the scope of 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 he/she 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 sentence; (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 were each 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 sentence; (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; and (e) the Defendants raised new grounds for final appeal that had not been subject to adjudication of the court of appeals, including (i) violation of the rules of evidence, (ii) failure to exhaust all necessary deliberations, and (iii) misapprehension of legal principles, the case holding that the foregoing grounds for final appeal presented by the Defendants are legitimate grounds for final appeal because they had not been subject to adjudication in the appellate trial
Prev Supreme Court Decision 2015Du3591 Decided March 28, 2019【Revocation of (Expected) Disposition Imposing Local Tax】
Next 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