logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.11.29 2015고정3108
의료법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is a person who is a German citizen of the Republic of Korea and has worked in G Anwon (Gu Hean Department) located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F from the date and time in 2006 to January 31, 2015 without obtaining a doctor’s license in Korea.

No person, other than medical personnel, shall perform medical practice, but may perform medical practice with the approval of the Minister of Health and Welfare when he/she stays in the Republic of Korea to exchange, teach, perform educational and research projects, or perform medical services of the International Medical Volunteers with a foreign medical license.

Nevertheless, on February 2013, the Defendant, without obtaining a doctor’s license and obtaining approval of medical practice by the Minister of Health and Welfare, performed dial-a-a-a-a-law operation against patients I who were fluent due to inconvenience to the left side in the G clinic of the above place.

B. In addition, around January 7, 2015, at the same place, medical treatment was conducted, such as diagnosis and postmortem examination of both eyes against patients J who have shown gymnasium or heavy snow, and diagnosis that the present state of snow is inappropriate for surgery.

2. The Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion that they had a German doctor’s license and were in charge of technical assistance, such as the production of software for the operation of dial-a-a-a-the-job (aSA80), which is an advanced vision correction, while serving in the above internal department, did not perform medical practice

§ 222(b) with respect to section 1(b) by doctor K.

The diagnosis, examination, and diagnosis of the J as described in the paragraph are conducted by the doctor L.

3. Determination

A. There are some statements in I’s investigative agency and this Court in the evidence that conforms to the facts charged in this part of the dial-a-a-dial operation of I.

However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, it is difficult to believe that I’s statements made to the investigation agency are in fact, and this is therefore difficult.

arrow