On November 30, 2004, the Defendant, who is not a doctor, is to receive KRW 800,000 from the lowest ○○○○○○○○ cafeteria located in the Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government IT on or around November 30, 200, for the purpose of profit-making, approximately 4 times the hexa 5cc, which is a substitute treatment agent, in the math of his female, receives approximately 80,000 won, and in the same manner at the same place on December 30 of the same year, receives the hexa in the ma, etc., and then in 06.

2. On 16. Along with the same method at the home of the same Ma○○○○ located in the Gu, he/she performed a crypation and removal procedure three times in total on his/her copine, and received a total of KRW 700,000,000 in cash, including musical instruments, from his/her female, and carried out medical practice.

2. Determination

According to the criminal records against the defendant and each judgment, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for one year by the Seoul Western District Court on November 21, 200 for a violation of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes (Unlawful Medical Service Providers) at the Seoul Western District Court on November 21, 200 and sentenced to two years of suspension of execution and fine 2,00,000 won, and the judgment becomes final and conclusive on the 29th day of the same month.

8. 8. The Jeju District Court sentenced 3 years of suspended sentence and 2,00,00 won to 2 years of imprisonment for the same crime, and the judgment was finalized on the 17th of the same month. Each crime is established from July 1998 to September 15, 2007 and operated medical practice by performing the act of removing oil around September 20, 207 and around June 20, 2007. In light of the method and method of crime, place of crime, number of crimes, time and period of crime, defendant's criminal record and the facts charged of this case, which was finalized before the sentence, are all of the criminal facts of this case, which were committed by the defendant for profit-making purposes, are related to comprehensive crimes (business crimes) (business crimes) in that they were conducted repeatedly for profit-making purposes, and therefore, the final judgment constitutes a comprehensive crime under subparagraph 1 of Article 36 of the Criminal Procedure Act and thus, a judgment of acquittal as to the facts charged of this case constitutes a final judgment.