The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the Defendant did not err by misapprehending the legal principles, or by misapprehending the legal principles, that found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in each of the instant case on the ground that such act constituted medical practice, unless there was no way to use only a service that helps customers correct the body of a customer for cosmetic purposes, or to cause physical harm.

The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, two million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

1) Determination of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles refers to the act of preventing or treating a disease caused by diagnosis, diagnosis, prescription, medication, or surgical surgery with the experience and function based on medical expertise, and other act that may cause harm to public health and sanitation if performed by a medical person. Here, “the risk of harm to public health and hygiene if performed by a medical person,” as stated in this context, is sufficient to be abstract risk, and thus, it cannot be said that there is no harm to public health and sanitation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do5964, May 10, 2012). In addition, in the case of various veterinary methods, such as massage or negative pressure, if the act was done for the mere recovery of skin, not for the mere recovery of skin, but for the treatment of a disease caused by any method that causes considerable physical shock to the body, that is, the act is likely to cause harm to public health and hygiene, i.e., medical practice (see, Supreme Court Decision 200Do128, Jan. 28, 2015).