Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

The Defendant is a person who operates a “B” store registered as an animal sales business and sold a lecture site.

No person shall conduct medical treatment to prevent animal diseases, such as dogs, sheep, cattle, etc., unless he/she passes a national examination conducted by the Minister of Agriculture and Forestry and without obtaining a license from the Director of the Department of Food and Agriculture for Livestock Industry.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not obtain a veterinarian license and sold the animal "B" located on the first floor of Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C Building operated by the Defendant, up to May 20, 2017, and the same year.

6.3. Around January 1, 201, a total of two defendants, sold in lots, performed non-licensed medical practice using 2 and three comprehensive white sprinks with a spacker for the lower part of the mouth.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. A written accusation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on animal sale business registration certificate;

1. Article 39 (1) 2 and 10 of the Act and Article 39 (1) 2 and 10 of the Act on the Judicial Selection of Punishment for Criminal Facts;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Taking into account the Defendant’s motive and frequency of crimes, risks, and detection of the reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, even if all of the sentencing conditions specified in the summary order, including the circumstances alleged by the Defendant, including the background leading to the instant crime, including the Defendant’s age, sex, criminal conduct, criminal record, means and consequence of the instant crime, are considered, the amount of fine specified in the summary order is excessive.

It does not seem that it does not appear.