A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.

Defendant

If A does not pay the above fine, it shall be 100.

Defendant

A as a doctor, is a person operating "E subject" in Suwon-si D, and Defendant B is a person in charge of counseling services for deadly patients in nursing care in the above imposition, and Defendant C is a person in charge of the overall administrative affairs of the above imposition, as a private qualification, as a private qualification.

1. A person who is not a medical person shall not perform medical practice, nor a medical person shall perform any medical practice other than those licensed;

Nevertheless, from October 29, 2016 to January 21, 2017, the Defendants conspired to engage in non-licensed medical practice by inserting the rowing injection, DNA injection, and Megala tetra la la la la la la la la la na on the back of the customer F, even though the said Etra la la la la na was not a medical practitioner.

2. Defendant A, at the same time, and at the same place as paragraph (1), Defendant B and C violated the Defendant’s duties as above.

Summary of Evidence

1. The Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Legal statement of witness G;

1. The protocol concerning the interrogation of each police suspect against the Defendants

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. A written accusation;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing cinematographic USB;

1. Article 87(1)2 and Article 27(1) of the Medical Service Act, and Article 91, Article 87(1)2 and Article 27(1)1 of the same Act, and Article 87(1)2 and Article 27(1)2 of the Medical Service Act, each of whom is selected to impose a fine on a person who commits a crime;

1. Defendant A who is detained in a workhouse: Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant B and C of suspended sentence: Article 59(1) of each Criminal Code (a) of the Criminal Code states that even though the Defendants are disputing the nature of a crime in the form of a legal doctrine, Defendant B appears to have an attitude to correct mistake, Defendant B, as a nursing assistant, had performed each of the instant procedures in accordance with the instructions of Defendant A, deemed that the Defendants had weak awareness of illegality, and all the Defendants were the first offender).