한의사면허자격정지처분 취소
1. The disposition taken by the Defendant against the Plaintiff on May 8, 2018 to revoke the disposition of one-month suspension of herb doctor license qualification.
2...
Details of the disposition
The Plaintiff is a herb doctor that establishes and operates a “Chovas Council member” located in Mapo-si B (hereinafter “Korea Medical Council member”).
In a case where a medical institution is not established in violation of Article 33(1) of the former Medical Service Act (amended by Act No. 14224, May 29, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the Plaintiff is engaged in the medical business without establishing a medical institution, despite the fact that the report on establishment of the medical institution was issued before the medical institution was issued. However, Article 4 [Attachment Table] of the former Rules on Administrative Dispositions Concerning the Administrative Measures Concerning Medical Treatment (amended by Act No. 14224, Dec. 1, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply) of the former Medical Service Act (amended by Act No. 14224, Dec. 1, 2016); and
1. Common standards:
(d) 1 and
2. Individual standards:
A. 22) On May 8, 2018, the Defendant: (a) with respect to the Plaintiff, the former Rules on Administrative Measures Concerning Medical Services (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare No. 587, Aug. 17, 2018; hereinafter the same shall apply) for the following reasons for disposition
Article 4 [Standards for Administrative Disposition in Attached Table]
1. Common standards:
(d) 1 and
2. Individual standards:
A. 22) Pursuant to 22), three months, the upper limit of the suspension period of qualification, were reduced to 1/2, and one month was reduced to 15th (from November 17, 2018 to February 31, 2018) and a disposition was taken to suspend the license of an oriental medicine doctor (hereinafter “instant disposition”). [In the absence of dispute as to the grounds for recognition, each entry of evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4, and the purport of the entire pleadings as to the legitimacy of the instant disposition, the intent of the parties’ assertion as to the legitimacy of the instant disposition is to notify the relevant administrative agency of certain legal facts or legal relations, and the report becomes effective as a report at the time of receipt of the report without the need to take measures, such as acceptance by the administrative agency, if the report satisfies legitimate requirements.
As the Plaintiff reported the establishment of a medical institution to the competent public health clinic on November 24, 2016, and its effect occurred immediately after the report was filed, the Plaintiff shall complete the report on the establishment of a medical institution and initiate the instant medical treatment.