1. As to the invalidity of fraud and indication in the line of duty, the lower court found the Defendant guilty on this part of the facts charged as in the first instance trial.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is justifiable.

In contrast to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there is no error of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or of misapprehending the legal principles on the fraud fraud, the crime of fraud fraud, and the crime

2. As to the violation of the Medical Service Act

A. Article 4(2) of the Medical Service Act provides that “A medical person shall not establish or operate a medical institution under the name of another medical person,” and the main text of Article 33(8) of the Medical Service Act provides that “A medical person shall not establish or operate two or more medical institutions under any pretext.” In light of the contents of the main text of Article 33(8) of the Medical Service Act, among acts contrary to the principle of one person’s establishment and operation, it is against the principle of one person’s establishment and operation, and overlapping of a medical institution means that “a medical person who already established a medical institution under his/her name has another medical person, etc. directly conduct medical acts at a medical institution established under his/her own name or has an unqualified person under his/her control,” and “a person who overlapping operation of a medical institution refers to a case where a medical person has two or more medical institutions perform relevant duties by dealing with matters related to the management of the affairs of transfer of existence or abolition of medical practice, funding, financing, recruitment of human resources and equipment, management of outcomes, etc.”

When the duplicate operation of medical institutions is conducted, it shall be in violation of the principle of establishment and operation per one person even if it does not fall under duplicate establishment.

B. Abdoes contrary to the principle of the establishment and operation of one person in a specific case.