logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.09.15 2017노3008
보건범죄단속에관한특별조치법위반(부정의료업자)등
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal is that each sentence (Defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor for one year and a fine of five million won, Defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for one year and a fine of two million won, a suspended sentence of two years) declared by the court below to the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the Defendants led to the confession of each of the crimes of this case, the Defendants returned each of the money received from patients F and L under the name of medical treatment expenses, the Defendants appear to have agreed with F and L, the patients K wanted to the effect that the Defendants’ act of non-licensed medical treatment did not cause harm to their own health, and the Defendants’ act of non-licensed treatment seems to be not the direct cause of the death of the patients, the Defendants A did not have any criminal history of the same crime, and there was no criminal record exceeding fines, and the Defendants B did not have any history of criminal punishment prior to the instant case, the Defendants could not have any history of criminal punishment prior to the instant case, the Defendants appears to have closed the exempted source, the Defendants’ health status is not good, and the Defendants must support the children with mental illness.

However, in this case, the defendants, other than medical personnel, advertised that they can treat terminal cancer in natural law through Internet sites, leafletss, placards, etc., and reported this fact to the terminal cancer patients, etc., and thus, the crime is not good, and thus, the risk of causing serious damage to the health and safety of the people is high, so it is necessary to strictly punish such act. The act of non-licensed medical treatment in this case was conducted several times for a considerable period of time, the defendants did not have much profits from such act, and the defendant A seems to have led to the act of non-licensed medical treatment in this case.

The age, age, and age of the Defendants as well as the above circumstances.

arrow