2...

A. The Plaintiff is an oriental medical doctor who reported the establishment of a C convalescent Hospital (hereinafter “instant hospital”) located in B in Naju-si.

B. On July 3, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that “Inasmuch as the instant hospital was found to have violated the standards for the establishment of a medical institution as a result of the investigation conducted by the private institution, it shall recover the total amount of medical care benefit paid during the opening period pursuant to Article 33(8) of the Medical Service Act and Article 57(1) of the National Health Insurance Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. On September 23, 2015, the Plaintiff is currently pending in the Supreme Court (Supreme Court Decision 2016Do1193) following a judgment of conviction on the charge of a violation of Article 33(8) of the Medical Service Act (Seoul High Court Decision 2015Da103) and an appellate trial (Dismissal of Appeal).

Defendant

D As a doctor, a medical person is unable to establish and operate two or more medical institutions under any pretext. While he operated two or more medical institutions from June 21, 1999, he was employed by Defendant A, an oriental medical doctor, around the lower end of September 27, 2012, in which he paid monthly salary of KRW 10 million to Defendant A, an oriental medical doctor, who was an oriental medical doctor, and made a report on the establishment of the instant hospital in the name of Defendant A, and managed and decided the human resources, funds, facilities, etc. of the instant hospital in the name of Defendant A, and operated two or more medical institutions by operating two or more hospitals in the form of Defendant D’s burden, etc., and Defendant A established and operated the instant hospital from September 27, 2012 to September 21, 2012 by providing the instant medical institution with assistance from opening and operating the instant hospital in the name of Defendant D’s first to December 27, 2014.