For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court found that Article 27(1) of the former Medical Service Act (amended by Act No. 16375, Apr. 23, 2019; hereinafter the same shall apply) cannot be deemed to violate the principle of clarity derived from the principle of no punishment without law, and that the restriction on fundamental rights under Article 27(1) of the former Medical Service Act conforms to the principle of proportionality, and thus cannot be deemed to be unconstitutional, and that Defendant C’s scambling and mathing operations constitute medical practice under the former Medical Service Act, and thereby, convicted

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on medical practice and legitimate act under the former Medical Service Act, which are the grounds for denying illegality.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.