No person, other than a doctor who engages in the medical service and directly examines, shall prepare a medical certificate, death certificate, certificate or prescription, and deliver or dispatch it to a patient.

Nevertheless, the defendant was willing to issue a prescription in the name of the defendant, even though the above F, G, H, I, J, K, K, L, M, N,O, and P were directly examined by the patient while on duty in the above E hospital emergency room.

On May 27, 2012, the Defendant: (a) did not have any fact in the emergency room of the above E Hospital; (b) on the same day, the Defendant had F of the public health care who treated patient Q prepare and deliver a prescription under the name of the Defendant; and (c) had the public health care personnel prepare and deliver 28 prescriptions under the name of the Defendant, as shown in the attached crime log, from around that time to December 30, 2013, as shown in the attached crime log.

Accordingly, the Defendant, in collusion with F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N,O, and P, prepared a prescription and issued it to the patient without a direct doctor.

2. The evidence submitted by the judgment prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize that the defendant conspireds with the public health listed in the attached list of crimes and prepared and delivered a prescription in the name of the defendant in an emergency room, and there is no other evidence to recognize the same (in the testimony of the witness in this court, according to the witness in this court, the defendant was unaware of the fact that he was designated as the doctor on duty at the time of the judgment, the prescription issued by the public health was a prescription automatically created by the computer, by entering the ID and password of the doctor designated as the doctor on duty at the time of the emergency room in advance, and accordingly.