1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a dentist who operates the Cental clinic located in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant medical care institution”).

B. On January 24, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition suspending a dentist’s license for the Plaintiff on January 24, 2018 (from July 1, 2018 to August 7, 2018) as follows:

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). In a case where, for the purpose of profit-making, a patient was introduced, arranged, enticed, or proposed to do so to a medical institution or a medical person, or where a medical technician went beyond the scope of his/her duties, the Plaintiff opened the instant medical care institution. The Plaintiff did not dispute the part of the grounds for disposition that, at the open commemorative event, the Plaintiff carried out the removal of tampstones from patients D and four other persons, and received 5,000 won at the discount of his/her own charges. The Plaintiff instructed employees E, who are dental technicians, to perform the duties of dental sanitarians, such as removal of tampers, radiation, and tampers, by ordering them to perform the duties of dental sanitarians, such as dental technicians, by ordering them to perform the duties of dental hygienists, such as dental technicians, etc.

Article 66 (1) 6 and 10 of the Medical Service Act and Article 27 (3) of the Regulations on Administrative Measures Relating to Medical Services [Attachment] related to Article 4 of the Regulations on Administrative Measures Relating to Medical Services (Ordinance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare No. 283, January 5, 2015)

1. Common standards:

(a) 2:

(d) 2;

2. Individual standards:

(a) 20), 37 / [Reasons for Recognition] A; entry of evidence No. 1; and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. A. Around June 1, 2015, the Plaintiff established the instant medical care institution. From June 18, 2015 to June 30, 2015, the Plaintiff held an event at a discount of one’s own charges at KRW 14,000 to KRW 5,00 (amounting to KRW 9,000) for patients who wish to perform a brush removal procedure.