beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. (i) Although Article 82(1) of the Medical Service Act, which enables the visually impaired persons to have exclusive business, violates the Constitution by infringing on the freedom of occupation and the right to pursue happiness of the visually impaired persons, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case based on the relevant legal basis, which erred by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion
B. The punishment sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 1.5 million won) is too unreasonable.
B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.
2. Determination:
A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, Article 82(1) of the Medical Service Act (hereinafter “instant provision”) provides that the visually impaired person may enjoy the viewing of life and human life.
Since the purpose of this study is to realize the right to enjoy a happy life, the legislative purpose is just, and in light of the characteristics of massage business, which is easy for the visually impaired who have developed a sense of promotion, it can be recognized that the legal provision of this case is an appropriate means to achieve such legislative purpose in order to provide them with an opportunity to support their livelihood and participate in occupational activities, by putting their massage business on the visually impaired in light of the characteristics of massage business, which is easy for the visually impaired who have developed sense of promotion.
Furthermore, in light of the fact that welfare policies for the visually disabled are insufficient, it is almost the only occupation that the visually disabled can choose, that other alternatives are not sufficient to guarantee the livelihood of the visually disabled when allowing the visually disabled to the visually disabled, and that the visually disabled need to take measures to give preferential treatment to the visually disabled in order to realize substantial equality as the minority who have been discriminated in daily life, such as education and employment, etc., it does not go against the least infringement principle.