The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, although the defendant only prescribed a package of the grounds for appeal and did not instruct the nurse F to administer the Rotototoo.

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court acknowledged the fact that the Defendant directed the nurse F to administer the Rototoo medication.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

(1) The contents of the defendant's instructions to F by using computers include the medication of penttotoo.

② On October 14, 2013, F was convicted of committing a violation of the Medical Service Act that, in accordance with the direction of the Defendant at the Busan District Court, E had not been recorded in the nursing log despite having administered the Rotototoo in accordance with the direction of the Defendant, F was found guilty of violation of the said Act. However, F’s appeal and appeal were dismissed, which became final and conclusive on May 16, 2014.

③ In the police investigation, the Defendant stated that the F had already been instructed to administer the Rototoo medication prior to F’s act of medication, and that F did not arbitrarily administer the Rotoo medicine.

④ At the direction of the Defendant at the police, I stated that the F used to the effect that the F administered a medication for the facilitation of delivery and not recorded in the nursing log, under the direction of the Defendant.

was stated.

⑤ In addition, there is no reason why F, the nurse, without the Defendant’s instruction, has to administer the penttoo, to E, and there is no particular circumstance that F, with respect to whether the me is administered or not, can be falsely reported to the Defendant.

(6) The legislative purport of Article 22(3) of the Medical Service Act is to punish cases where a medical dispute arises, as a comprehensive medical record for diagnosis, treatment, etc. of a doctor's patient, it is used as evidence. Therefore, it is intended to punish cases where an additional statement or correction is made intentionally differently from the fact.