beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.
If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant (hereinafter “D’s life”) did not obtain the recognition of a massage from the competent Mayor/Do governor, but around 12:50 on May 9, 201, at around 2:0, the second floor of the Mapo-gu Seoul E-building (F), the Defendant laid the place to the customers who found it for 60 minutes of hand and elbows, etc., and took part in 33,000 won from the customers in return for taking part in the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the term “E-building”, and took part in 33:00 won from the customers in return for taking part in the front of the last of the last of the 2011 to May 13:40, 201, and took part in 45 for profit-making purposes against the average number of customers per day from around 20 months to around 45 months to May 13, 2011.
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement of the accused in the first protocol of trial;
1. Each statement made by Co-defendant G, H and I in the first trial record;
1. Application of the police interrogation protocol to J
1. The main sentence of Article 88 and Article 82 (1) Governing the relevant provisions concerning facts constituting an offense;
1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;
1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act
1. The provisions of the Medical Service Act of this case that grant qualification to the visually impaired only is unconstitutional or highly likely to be constitutional.
2. The Constitutional Court rendered a decision that the above provision does not violate the Constitution on October 30, 2008, like the Constitutional Court Order 2006Hun-Ma1098, etc. (Supreme Court Decision 2008Hun-Ma664, Jul. 29, 2010) and the Constitutional Court Decision 2008Hun-Ma664, Jun. 27, 2013.
[Reference to the Constitutional Court Decision 2011Hun-Ga39, 2012Hun-Ma608, and 2013Hun-Ga, decided June 27, 2013]