logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2020.06.04 2019구합81766
의사면허자격정지처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Details of the disposition

The plaintiff is a doctor who has served as the director general of the child and the bureau at the C Hospital located in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as the "instant hospital").

On October 5, 2018, the Plaintiff received economic benefits equivalent to KRW 3.88,00,00,000, including a total of KRW 3.580,000,000,000,000,000, in nine times from October 5, 2014 to July 2015, for the purpose of promoting sales, such as inducing the adoption and adoption of drugs by a pharmaceutical company operator D, and from January 2015 to May 2015, the Plaintiff received a total of KRW 3.60,000,00 in cash from the business operator of the KFE to May 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “instant criminal fact”), as a violation of the Medical Service Act, with respect to the criminal fact that “the Plaintiff was issued a summary order of KRW 2,00,000 and KRW 424,00,00,000,00,000,00,00.”

On December 6, 2018, the Defendant: (a) obtained unfair economic benefits, etc. in violation of Article 23-2 of the former Medical Service Act (amended by Act No. 13658, Dec. 29, 2015; hereinafter the same) on the ground that “the Plaintiff was taking unfair economic benefits, etc. due to the instant criminal facts”; (b) Article 66(1)9 of the Medical Service Act; (c) Article 4 [Attachment] [Attachment] of the former Rules on Administrative Dispositions Related to Medical Services (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare No. 283, Jan. 5, 2015;

2. Individual standards:

A. Based on the 16th [Attachment 2] [Attachment 2] [Attachment 2]], the Plaintiff suspended his/her license for the second month (from May 1, 2019 to June 30, 2019) (hereinafter “instant disposition”) (hereinafter “instant disposition”). [The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant disposition is legitimate as a whole, is limited to the Plaintiff’s juveniles and the Director General of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of the Organization of

arrow