All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal found the Defendants guilty of the facts charged in the instant case, but Defendant A’s act of removing her maternal transfusion using 532nm puls pulos (hereinafter “the medical device of this case”) is merely an act of treatment assistance, not a medical practice. Thus, Defendant A, an assistant nurse, falls under the duties that can be performed under the direction of Defendant B, a doctor, and is not a domestic work.

Even if there are less side effects or risks of the medical device of this case, and Defendant A’s practice experience is highly acceptable by social norms, the illegality is dismissed.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of violating the Medical Service Act was erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

2. We examine the following circumstances, i.e., the medical device of this case, which is acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below as guilty of the facts charged of this case, i.e., the risks of which are less likely to occur than 1,00n pulp dulp dulp dulp dulp dulp dulp dulp dulp dulp dulp dulp dulp dule, but there is sufficient possibility of side effects such as pain and image, etc. according to the method of use, and the medical device of this case can be seen as securing safety only when the doctor examines the patient's reaction due to its use and adjusts the method of procedure.

In addition, Defendant B was engaged in hosting the instant medical device and orally ordering Defendant A to give treatment methods, and it does not seem that the degree of harm to health and hygiene, which may arise from the use of the instant medical device, is small, and there are other side effects on the operating principles and methods of the instant medical device.