약학회지

ISSN 0377-9556 (PRINT)
ISSN 2383-9457 (ONLINE)

Table. 2.

Table. 2.

Lending license (A) related precedents

Case ID Precedent case # (Date Sentenced) Plaintiff (P) and Defendant (D) Outline of the case Disposition against a pharmacist
1 Supreme Court 2002 DO 6829 (2003.6.24.) D: Pharmacist A and Pharmacist B • 1996.5.-2001.3.
• Pharmacist B received KRW 42,200,000 on the condition that Pharmacist B lent a license to Pharmacist A.
• Pharmacists A and B are both guilty
2 Supreme Court 2019 DOO 61243 (2020.10.15.) P: Pharmacist D: National Health Insurance Service • 2008.11.12.-2010.10.7.
• Pharmacist lent a license to an unqualified head of a hospital.
• Unfairly received KRW 3,708,237,300 for NHI benefit
• Unfairly received KRW 1,484,106,930 for medical care benefits
• Collection of KRW 5,192,344,230 in full
3 Supreme Court 2014 DA 218979 (main lawsuit) 2014 DA 218986 (countersuit) (2015.5.14.) P1: Pharmacy owner (non-pharmacist) P2: Pharmacist D: National Health Insurance Service • 2005.9.21-2007.10.17
• Pharmacist lent a license to an unqualified person
• Unfairly received KRW 961,989,650 for medical care benefit
• Penalty of KRW 7,000,000
• Payment of KRW 961,989,650 for medical care benefits notified redemption, 5% per year from October 18, 2007 to the date of delivery of the copy of the complaint, and 20% per year from the next day to the date of full payment.
4 Seoul Administrative Court 2009 GOOHAB 13572 (2009.11.27.) P: Pharmacist D: Minister of Health and Welfare • 2001.8.1-2001.10.28
• Falsely reported the number of working pharmacists
• Unfairly received KRW 4,629,160 for medical care benefits
• Penalty of KRW 18,516,640
Yakhak Hoeji 2023;67:94-102 https://doi.org/10.17480/psk.2023.67.2.94
© 2023 Yakhak Hoeji