1. The main part of the lawsuit in this case shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a medical doctor working as a medical doctor in B Hospital, and around September 24, 2014, the Plaintiff treated and delivered medicines necessary for patient C’s satise and satise care in the medical clinic outside of B Hospital, and entered and delivered them in a prescription for C (hereinafter “instant act”), and caused C to have the medical doctor prepare the said medicine at the pharmacy, and took the medicine at the pharmacy, and she recovered.

B. On June 26, 2015, the prosecutor of the Seoul East District Prosecutors’ Office (Seoul East District Prosecutors’ Office) rendered a disposition of suspending prosecution against the suspected violation of the Medical Service Act that committed the instant act even though he/she did not directly conduct the medical service and did not issue a prescription to the Plaintiff.

C. On June 2, 2016, the Defendant recognized that the instant act constitutes a case in which medical records, etc. have not been recorded, and notified the Plaintiff that suspension of qualifications for 15 days and warning should be taken from January 31, 2016 to February 14, 2016 pursuant to Articles 22(1) and 66(1)10 of the Medical Service Act, and Article 4 [Attachment Table] of the Rules on Administrative Dispositions Concerning Medical Services, [Attachment Table] 1(d) and 2(a)13 of the Rules on Administrative Dispositions Concerning Medical Services.

On July 4, 2016, the Defendant corrected the error regarding the period of suspension of qualification, etc., and notified the Plaintiff of “Correctional Notification of Administrative Dispositions” that the suspension of qualification for seven days from January 1, 2017 to July 7 of the same month in accordance with the relevant statutes and regulations.

E. On November 25, 2016, the Defendant recognized that the instant act constituted a case in which medical records, etc. were falsely or intentionally written differently from the fact, and issued a disposition suspending qualification for seven days from January 1, 2017 to July 7, 201 pursuant to Articles 22(1) and 66(1)10 of the Medical Service Act, and Article 4 [Attachment Table] 1(d) and 2(a)15 of the Rules on Administrative Measures Concerning Medical Services, the Defendant recognized that the instant act constituted a case in which medical records, etc. were prepared or written differently from the fact.