(Health Korea News / Soon-Ho Lee) The Fair Trade Commission, which lost the lawsuit against Korea Vaccine to cancel the imposition of fines, ultimately chose to go to the Supreme Court. However, it does not seem easy to overturn the result because the illegal charges that were the basis for imposing the fine have already been confirmed as not guilty.
The Fair Trade Commission recently submitted an appeal to the Seoul High Court after losing the lawsuit pending against Korea Vaccine to cancel the corrective order and fine payment order. Accordingly, the legal battle between the two sides will be moved to the Supreme Court, the final venue, and will continue.
The Fair Trade Commission is currently in the process of administrative litigation with a number of pharmaceutical companies that have been fined for alleged vaccine collusion. As the outcome of the lawsuit against Korea Vaccine is expected to have a significant impact on the ongoing litigation with these pharmaceutical companies, it is making all-out efforts to overturn the previously handed down ruling. It is predicted that it will unfold.
This lawsuit was filed by the Fair Trade Commission, which judged that Korea Vaccine’s intentional cancellation of supplies had led to a shortage of BCG vaccine for infants and toddlers for two years, and reported Korea Vaccine to the prosecution while imposing a corrective order and a fine of 990 million won. It all started when the company objected.
However, as the criminal and administrative lawsuits were carried out simultaneously, the Seoul High Court, which was in charge of the administrative lawsuit (suit to cancel the imposition of fines), suspended the hearing on the merits while the results of the criminal lawsuit were pending to avoid confusion in the ruling, and then in March of last year. When Korea Vaccine’s innocence was confirmed, a verdict in favor of the plaintiff was declared after only two arguments.
The Seoul High Court dismissed the Fair Trade Commission’s claim that Korea Vaccine abused its market-dominant position by intentionally reducing or canceling its plan to import the intradermal BCG vaccine in order to increase sales of its main product, the transdermal BCG vaccine, as insufficient evidence and excessive interpretation. did it
It is explained that adjusting the import plan for the Korean vaccine was an inevitable measure as there was no definitive order from the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency and there was a global supply shortage of intradermal BCG vaccine.
In addition, as it was acknowledged through the criminal lawsuit that Korea Vaccine was not in a market-dominant position and that there was no act of controlling shipments, it was judged that the fine based on this should be canceled.
Previously, the Seoul Central District Court, which was in charge of the first trial of the criminal lawsuit, found Korea Vaccine not guilty, saying, “It is difficult to say that it unfairly adjusted the quantity of vaccine shipment for the transdermal BCG vaccine or interfered with the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KCDC at the time).”
Afterwards, the prosecution appealed to the Seoul High Court, but it was dismissed, and the Supreme Court appeal ended with the Korean Vaccine victory, confirming the first trial acquittal.
The results of this administrative lawsuit between the Fair Trade Commission and Korea Vaccine are expected to have an impact on administrative lawsuits against other pharmaceutical companies involved in the large-scale vaccine collusion incident triggered by the Korea Vaccine incident. This is why the Fair Trade Commission has no choice but to go to the Supreme Court even in situations where it is difficult to predict victory.
During the investigation, the prosecution, which took over the Korean vaccine case from the Fair Trade Commission in 2019, found that six pharmaceutical companies and drug distributors, including GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), GC Green Cross, Yuhan Corporation, Boryung Biopharma, SK Discovery, and Kwangdong Pharmaceutical, were required to vaccinate countries. We found additional charges of collusion in the support project (NIP) and requested additional charges against these pharmaceutical companies from the Fair Trade Commission.
Afterwards, these pharmaceutical and distribution companies, who were additionally accused by the Fair Trade Commission, were indicted on charges of profiteering by setting up sidekick companies while participating in NIP bidding. In addition, the Fair Trade Commission imposed fines totaling 40.9 billion won on 32 pharmaceutical and distribution companies involved in the incident.
The Seoul Central District Court, which was in charge of the first trial of the criminal trial, found the pharmaceutical and distribution companies guilty, but the Seoul High Court, the second trial court, found the pharmaceutical and distribution companies not guilty and overturned the first trial ruling.
The Seoul High Court (Criminal Division 3), which took charge of the case at the time, said, “It is difficult to say that price formation through fair and free competition was premised on the NIP bidding in the first place, and that there was an intention by the defendants to harm fairness by limiting competition or influencing the winning bid. “It has not been proven.”
The prosecution filed an appeal against the Seoul High Court’s ruling, and the appeal is currently in progress at the Supreme Court.
These pharmaceutical and distribution companies are also filing administrative lawsuits against the Fair Trade Commission’s fines for collusion in NIP bids. If the pharmaceutical companies win the appeal in the criminal case and are confirmed not guilty, the court is likely to revoke the imposition of fines imposed on the pharmaceutical and distributor by referring to the Korean Vaccine Administrative Litigation ruling.
This is why the Fair Trade Commission is expected to make all-out efforts in the appeal trial of the administrative lawsuit against Korea Vaccine (a suit to cancel the imposition of fines).
Copyright © Health Korea News Unauthorized reproduction and redistribution prohibited
Source: www.hkn24.com
