beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.02 2015노826

의료법위반

Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the assertion of unconstitutionality concerning the provision on the medical law claiming mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles was filed after the lapse of the period for filing an appeal, it is not possible to serve as a legitimate ground for appeal.

1) The Defendants have a certificate of national technical qualification of beauty artist, and the Defendants are aware that, as a result of the national technical qualification examination process, physical strength such as the skin, etc. should be ensured, and that it constitutes the skin management rather than the skin management without any force. Accordingly, Defendant A merely performed the skin management in a manner that does not have physical force, such as the skin. Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendants claiming unfair sentencing (the Defendant A’s fine of KRW 1,50,000, and the Defendant B’s fine of KRW 3,000,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Article 2 of the Regulations on Determination of misunderstanding of Facts or misunderstanding of legal principles (Ordinance of the Ministry for Health, Welfare and Family Affairs No. 18 based on Article 82 of the Medical Service Act) provides that “the use of various climatic methods, such as marine pressure, etc. or electrical appliances, or other climatic methods to the human body” with respect to the limitation of duties of a clibage. Here, various climatic methods refer to the physical procedure to facilitate the blood cycle of a person’s body by means of cutting down, cutting, clifing, clifing or cutting down the body parts, such as the part of the human body, such as the part of cliffa or the part of the human body, or recovering from the health of symptoms, such as pain pain, etc., regardless of the name of the cliffa or the clifa

Supreme Court Decision 2001Do6554 Delivered on January 29, 2004