In sentencing, judges shall determine the sentence in consideration of the conditions of sentencing within the scope of the applicable sentences formed through the reduction or exemption, aggravation, etc. of the statutory penalty.

On the other hand, in cases where both punishment of imprisonment and a fine are to be imposed concurrently, it is illegal to reduce the amount of punishment only, unless there is a special provision, and not to reduce the amount of a fine.

(See Supreme Court Decision 96Do3466 delivered on August 26, 1997, etc.). The lower court upheld the first instance judgment that sentenced the Defendant to imprisonment with prison labor and a fine of KRW 7 million for a limited term under Article 5 subparag. 1 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes and Article 27 of the Medical Service Act, which applied Article 5 subparag. 1 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes, and sentenced the Defendant to discretionary mitigation under Article 53, 55(1)3 and 6 of the Criminal Act.

However, Article 5 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes provides that a person who conducts medical practice for profit-making purposes in violation of Article 27 of the Medical Service Act shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for life or for not less than two years, and a fine of not less than one million won but not more than ten million won shall be imposed concurrently. Accordingly, in case of discretionary mitigation, the amount of the fine shall be 1/2 of the maximum amount pursuant to Article 55(1)6 of the Criminal Act, and accordingly, the court below shall determine the sentence of the fine within the scope of the sentence.

Nevertheless, the court below maintained the judgment of the court of first instance which sentenced the defendant to one year and six months of imprisonment with prison labor and seven million won of fine, and there is an error in the court below's determination of punishment in excess of the scope of punishment.

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the grounds of appeal, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion.