The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Where a criminal trial becomes final and conclusive substantially, it shall not be repeatedly punished for the same offense, and where the same case with a final and conclusive judgment is prosecuted, the acquittal shall be pronounced by judgment;

At this time, the identity of the facts charged or the facts charged should be determined in consideration of the legal functions of the identity of the facts, based on the defendant's act and the social facts, and its normative elements should also be considered.

(1) Article 27(1) of the Medical Service Act prohibits a person, other than a medical person, from performing any medical act other than those licensed, and Article 87(1)2 of the same Act provides that a person, who is not a medical person, shall not perform any medical act other than those licensed, shall be punished.

In addition, Article 5 subparag. 1 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes provides aggravated punishment for “a person other than a doctor who conducts medical practice for profit in violation of Article 27 of the Medical Service Act.”

However, since non-licensed medical practice is expected to repeat the same crime due to the nature of the constituent elements of the crime, if a person who conducts non-licensed medical practice for profit-making purposes continues to conduct multiple non-licensed medical practice for a certain period of time under the criminal intent repeatedly and continuously, and such damage legal benefits are the same, each act should be punished by a single comprehensive crime.

On the other hand, in case where a judgment becomes final and conclusive on part of the crimes related to an inclusive crime, a judgment of acquittal shall be rendered on the crime committed prior to the pronouncement of judgment at a fact-finding court, since res judicata of the final and conclusive judgment has not yet expired, and Supreme Court Decision 94Do1318 delivered on August 9, 194.