Pharmacy student not prosecuted for giving 'narcotic' prescription to senior at the request of "I need to replenish inventory"... Why?

A pharmacy student who was sent on charges of receiving and delivering sleep-inducing drug prescriptions at the request of a senior pharmacist was acquitted.

Last January, the Chuncheon District Prosecutors' Office decided not to indict Mr. A, a man in his 20s, who was suspected of aiding and abetting a violation of the Narcotics Control Act due to insufficient evidence.

Mr. A was accused of obtaining prescriptions for the sleep-inducing drug Stilnox (zolpidem) on two occasions in 2019 and 2020 and providing them to Mr. B, a senior at pharmacy school.

It was found that Mr. A, who was a pharmacy student at the time of the incident, received this request and handed over the prescription while working part-time at a pharmacy run by Mr. B.

At the time, Mr. B is known to have requested from Mr. A, "Since the drug inventory does not match due to poor management, if you receive a prescription, you can match the computerized dispensing details with the actual drug quantity."

However, it was revealed that Mr. B had made a false report by using the prescription handed over by Mr. A and others by entering false information into the integrated narcotic management system as if the drug had been normally dispensed to the patient.

Through this, Mr. B was eventually handed over to trial on charges of illegal possession of more than 80,000 tablets of the drug over a period of five years, including for the purpose of direct administration.

Person A denied the charges.

In addition to being a student with limited pharmacy experience, it was difficult to refuse the request of Mr. B, who exerted considerable influence on current students through support for club activities and recruitment of part-time workers.

In addition, he claimed that he only thought it was for the purpose of 'replenishing inventory' and had no knowledge that Mr. B would administer the drug or illegally possess it for purposes other than its intended purpose.

The prosecution found that Mr. A was not guilty.

The prosecution stated the reason for non-indictment, saying, "Even after examining the contents of the messenger conversation, there are no circumstances to believe that Mr. A was aware of Mr. B's possession or administration of medication for a purpose other than that of Mr.

Attorney Lee Il-hyung of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, said, "By carefully analyzing the entire mobile messenger conversation history, we presented as objective evidence the circumstances in which our client had no knowledge of the purpose of the senior's crime and rather tried to turn it down around the corner. We achieved good results by logically explaining the specific hierarchical relationship that made it difficult to refuse the senior's request and proving that there was no intentionality of aiding and abetting."

#Sleep inducer #Not guilty #Pharmacy student #Prescription #Accident

Shin Min-ji (sourminjee@ikbc.co.kr)
 

[View full article]
Pharmacy student not prosecuted for giving 'narcotic' prescription at the request of senior to "replenish inventory"... Why? (Shortcut)