Diet Pill Use Nearly Leads to Drug Offense...Nurse Assistant Found Not Guilty in Appeal Trial

'Nabiyak' Medication Charge Acquitted
Court: "Statements During Prosecutor's Investigation Open to Interpretation"
Hospital Director and Pharmacist Testimonies Considered
However, "Multiple Prescription Forgeries, Serious Offense"

“The suspect knows that some diet pills contain narcotics.” (Prosecutor)
“Yes, I knew from news reports and other sources.” (Mr. A)
“Considering the suspect’s nearly 10 years of experience as a nursing assistant, the fact that the suspect already knew that some diet pills contain narcotics, and that the suspect searched extensively for diet pill reviews and other related information, it seems that the suspect must have at least tacitly suspected that some of the diet pills obtained at the start of the crime might contain narcotic ingredients. What do you say to that?” (Prosecutor)
“(Shedding tears) Yes, I am sorry. I will never do it again.” (Mr. A)

A nursing assistant accused of forging prescriptions to take so-called ‘Nabi-yak’ (butterfly pills) for diet purposes was acquitted in the appellate court. However, the charge of forging prescriptions was upheld, and a fine was imposed. The court ruled in favor of the defendant, citing issues with the prosecution’s interrogation process.

The Criminal Appeals Division 1-3 of the Seoul Western District Court (Presiding Judge An Jong-hwa) overturned the original verdict against Mr. A (34), who was charged with forgery of private documents, use of forged private documents, and violation of the Narcotics Control Act (psychotropic substances), and sentenced him to a fine of 4 million KRW. The court acquitted him of the charges related to the purchase and use of the psychotropic drug phentermine.

Mr. A Maintains “I Didn’t Know It Was Phentermine”... Court Says “Interpretation Possible”

The court, referring to Supreme Court precedents, judged that based solely on the evidence submitted by the prosecution, it is difficult to conclude that the defendant was aware that the appetite suppressant ‘Dietamin tablets’ contained phentermine when purchasing and taking it. According to Supreme Court precedents, “For the crime of purchasing and using psychotropic drugs to be established, the offender must have at least tacitly recognized that the substance was a psychotropic drug at the time of purchase and use.” The court ruled that “the original verdict contains a factual error that affected the judgment.”

According to the court, Mr. A consistently stated during police investigations that he did not know whether Dietamin contained phentermine. He also testified during prosecution questioning that he initially did not know that phentermine was classified as a narcotic. Furthermore, during the appellate trial, when the judge asked, “Does the appetite suppressant originally contain phentermine?” Mr. A replied, “I didn’t know well, and only learned that it contained psychotropic substances during the police investigation.”

The court pointed out that there is room for interpretation regarding the suspect’s statements obtained by the prosecution. The court said, “It is unclear whether the statement was based on the time of investigation or the time of purchase and use of phentermine. The part where he says ‘I am sorry’ should not be interpreted as an admission of awareness of the presence of phentermine, but rather as a statement expressing that he will not commit such a crime again.”

Considering Testimonies of Hospital Director and Pharmacist... Prescription Forgery Found Guilty

The court also noted that in a letter of apology submitted by Mr. A to the first trial court, he wrote, “Regarding this matter, as a nursing assistant, it is a crime I should never commit, but I was too ignorant,” which could be interpreted as indicating he did not know about the presence of phentermine. Additionally, the court considered the hospital director’s testimony that Mr. A had no experience handling psychotropic drugs and thought of them simply as appetite suppressants, as well as the pharmacist’s testimony that proper medication guidance was not provided.

The court pointed out, “Despite being a nursing assistant, Mr. A repeatedly forged and used prescriptions related to his duties, and the nature of the crime is not light.”

However, the court explained the sentencing by stating, “The drugs on the forged and used prescriptions are commonly prescribed for diet purposes in general internal medicine clinics. Considering that Mr. A visited another hospital to get appetite suppressant prescriptions during the COVID-19 pandemic, fearing disadvantages at his workplace if he contracted COVID-19, there is some room for leniency based on Mr. A’s explanation.”