篇名

以虛偽藥品之實驗論文作為廣告用途未違反藥事法   免費試閱

並列篇名

A Pharmaceutical Corporation Is Not Guilty Because Its Forged Essay of Experiments Didn't Violate the Regulation of Unreal Advertising According to the Pharmaceutical Affairs Law

作者
中文摘要

平成26年特(臞)第914號、第1029號?事法違反被告事件
本件被告製藥公司涉嫌竄改、作成虛偽論文,並將該虛偽之藥品實驗論文作為該公司廣告用途,刊載於相關學術雜誌、雜誌社網站等處,涉嫌藥品廣告不實,被檢察官提起公訴。本件主要爭點之一為該論文之「投稿、刊載」行為是否符合昭和35年藥事法第66條第1項所示之「廣告不實」。針對法律解釋,法官認為藥事法第66條第1項所指「不實之廣告敘述」需具備:一、特定性(即明示特定商品品名);二、認知性(即讓多數人可理解該內容);三、引誘性(即促進消費者購買欲望)等三性質。本件廣告僅涉及一、二兩項,但欠缺第三項引誘性,故未違法。

英文摘要

This case refers to a pharmaceutical corporation as the accused who forged essays and published on academic journals and websites of presses as advertisings. The Prosecutor accused it therefore. The legal issue of this case is whether the behaviors like submitting and being published belong to the unreal advertising which was regulated in the paragraph 66 section 1 of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Law in 1960. The Judge infers that an unreal advertising needs three elements: certainty (certain names of products), understanding (the content shall be understood by people) and luring (encouraging the desire of purchasing). The advertising has only the former two elements and lacks the latest one. It is not guilty consequently.

起訖頁

108-113

出版單位
DOI

10.3966/241553062017120014009  複製DOI  DOI查詢

QRCode

數位整合服務
產品服務
讀者服務專線:+886-2-23756688   傳真:+886-2-23318496   地址:臺北市館前路18 號 5 樓

Copyright © 元照出版 All rights reserved. 版權所有,禁止轉貼節錄
TOP