2. In light of the strict provisions and legislative purpose of the Medical Service Act that allows only those who are licensed to perform medical practice dealing with human life or body to protect and promote the health of the public, strict regulations and punishment are necessary for the act of this case in light of the following: (a) the Defendants committed the crime of this case; (b) Defendant A did not have any previous criminal record or fine; (c) Defendant A did not directly provide medical treatment due to the attachment; and (d) Defendant A did not temporarily order Defendant B, not the doctor; and (c) the period of non-licensed medical practice was not long; (d) the Defendants did not have any previous criminal record or punishment; (e) Defendant B did not have any previous criminal record; and (e) Defendant B did not directly provide medical treatment due to the attachment; and (e) the Defendants did not have any previous criminal record or punishment; and (e) the Defendants did not have any previous criminal record or punishment for non-licensed medical practice like the crime of this case; (e) the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, family relationship, and circumstances after the crime.

3. As such, the Defendants’ appeal is without merit. Thus, all of the appeals are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.