logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.10.27 2016구합4393
치과의사면허자격정지처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 21, 2014, the Plaintiff, a dentist, was sentenced to a judgment of conviction of two years of suspended execution (hereinafter “instant judgment”) by imprisonment with labor for the following criminal facts by the District Court (hereinafter “instant judgment”) and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

On September 21, 2007, the Plaintiff in violation of the Medical Service Act established a dental clinic with C and the instant dental clinic in collaboration with C, a medical institution, by jointly operating the hospital with the knowledge of the fact that C is not a medical person, while jointly operating the hospital with the knowledge of the fact that it was a dental clinic on the third floor of the Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building, and by investing the remaining 40% of the profits to be distributed by C, with an investment of the total of KRW 150 million, which is equipped with various medical equipment, and filing a report on the establishment of a dental clinic in the name of the Plaintiff with the Dobong-gu Office (hereinafter “instant dental clinic”). From that time, the Plaintiff jointly operating the dental clinic of this case with C and the instant dental clinic until January 31, 2010, established the dental clinic as a medical institution.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff, in collusion with non-medical persons, established a medical institution.

The plaintiff and C agreed to distribute profits from the operation of dental clinics to the same business, and agreed to set up a DNA dental clinic in the name of the plaintiff and to increase profits while jointly operating the dental clinic, the plaintiff and C filed a false claim for insurance benefits and medical benefits with the victim and conspired to divide them into payments.

On December 3, 2007, the Plaintiff and C had E working as the head of the instant dental clinic access to the insurance benefit claim program using a computer installed therein, and the Plaintiff and C filed a claim for insurance benefits of KRW 8,790 with the victim as if the Plaintiff and C were to have received medical treatment by committing the instant dental clinic on November 11, 2007. On November 16, 2007, G filed a claim for medical benefits of KRW 42,691 with the dental clinic of this case. However, F and G were to have received medical treatment by committing the instant dental clinic of this case.

arrow