B. Whether the exclusion provision under Paragraph (a) applies to ex officio disciplinary committee members

C. Effect of exercising the right to discipline in violation of paragraph (a).

B. Unlike the challenge system, the exclusion system is a system that is naturally unable to perform the duties of the case on the ground that there is a cause for exclusion without the request of the party or a trial, etc., and thus, a disciplinary commissioner who has a cause for exclusion is an ex officio member, even though he/she is not an ex officio member and there is no person applying for a judgment of exclusion of the disciplinary commissioner in the disciplinary procedure, he/she shall be excluded from the execution of duties

C. Article 94 of the Regulations on the Operation of Regional Medical Insurance Associations provides for the exclusion of disciplinary committee members is to ensure fair and reasonable exercise of disciplinary rights, and the exercise of disciplinary rights in violation is invalid as it goes against justice in the procedure, regardless of whether the grounds for disciplinary action are recognized.

Of the costs of appeal, the costs of appeal shall be borne by the Intervenor joining the Defendant, and the remainder shall be borne by the Defendant.

Article 94 of the Operational Rules of the Regional Medical Insurance Association (hereinafter referred to as the "Operation Rules") provides that "no relative of a disciplinary suspect or a person related to the disciplinary cause shall participate in the deliberation of the disciplinary case." The purport of the above provision is that a relative of a disciplinary suspect or a person related to the disciplinary cause shall be deemed to be a person who shares understanding with the disciplinary suspect, or a person who is the victim of the disciplinary cause, or a person who has an interest in the disciplinary cause shall be excluded from all of the disciplinary causes regardless of whether he/she is the employer or the victim of the disciplinary cause. Unlike the system of application for challenge, the exclusion system is a system that makes it impossible to perform his/her duties in the relevant case as a matter of course on the grounds that there is no need to go through special procedures such as a party's request or trial. Thus, even if an ex officio member is an ex officio member, and there is no request for a judgment of exclusion against the disciplinary commissioner in the disciplinary procedure, Article 94 of the Operational Rule provides that the exclusion of the disciplinary commissioner shall guarantee fair and reasonable exercise of rights, and reasonable.

The precedents cited by theory do not constitute a proper precedent to refer to the instant case, unlike the instant case. The arguments are without merit.

In addition, since the plaintiff's dismissal of the result of the examination of disciplinary action against the Appellate Committee of the Medical Insurance Federation, the plaintiff's assertion that the violation of disciplinary procedure was cured cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal due to a new argument in the trial that the defendant or the defendant joining the defendant did not reach the original trial. There is no ground for appeal.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Shin Sung-sung (Presiding Justice)