Judgment of summary order and acquittal on part of unauthorized medical practice

Since non-licensed medical acts are expected to be repeated due to the nature of the constituent elements of the crime, several repeated acts constitute one crime comprehensively, if a summary order has become final and conclusive as to part of the non-licensed medical acts over four months (from January 30, 1982 to June 17, 1982), the effect of such summary order shall extend to all of the non-licensed medical acts of this case prior to such notification (as of July 7, 1982), so a judgment of acquittal shall be rendered as it falls under the case where a final and conclusive judgment has already been rendered.

Article 25(1) of the Medical Service Act, Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 326 and 457 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 66Do928 Decided September 20, 1966

Defendant 1 and one other

Prosecutor

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 82No6946 delivered on March 3, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Since non-licensed medical acts in violation of Article 25 of the Medical Service Act are expected to be repeated due to the nature of the elements of the crime, multiple repeated acts constitute a single crime (refer to Supreme Court Decision 66Do928 delivered on September 20, 196). The court below held that Defendant 1's medical acts in this case were conducted between January 30, 1982 and June 17 of the same year, while Defendant 1 had engaged in non-licensed medical acts in this case's indictment at around 16:00 on April 16, 1982, and Defendant 2 had employed Defendant 1, each of them was indicted, and the summary order was finalized on July 7, 1982 by being notified at the Dong Branch Branch of the Seoul District Court and recognized that the medical acts in this case and the medical acts in the above summary order at the time constitute an independent crime, and thus, the judgment below's non-licensed medical acts in this case's judgment constitutes an independent crime prior to acquittal of the above summary order.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Jeong Tae-tae (Presiding Justice)