The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is recognized that Defendant A ordered Defendant A to engage in landscape dynamic L-Pibing crowdfunding against G in patients who are not medical personnel in light of the fact that Defendant A was a nurse of the third floor of the F medical care hospital and who was in charge of the overall management of nurses and nursing personnel. Defendant A is an employee of Defendant A medical corporation, and thus, Defendant C’s violation of the Medical Service Act is also recognized.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendants not guilty because it failed to exhaust all necessary deliberations, such as the examination of the witness of D, and there is an error of incomplete deliberation or misconception of facts.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in this case is that the facts charged in the indictment in the case of the Gyeonggi-do X-si of Pakistan are stated as the Gyeonggi-do, the facts charged in the indictment in the case of the Gyeonggi-do, and it is clear that it is the clerical error of the Gyeonggi-do, X in the case of the Gyeonggi-do.

It is a person who was a nursing of the FF convalescent Hospital (hereinafter referred to as the “instant hospital”).

1) Defendant A’s teacher in violation of the Medical Service Act is the three-story nurse of the instant hospital. Any person is not a medical person, and no medical person is allowed to perform any medical practice other than those licensed. Nevertheless, on February 12, 2016, Defendant A, at the third-class ward ward of the instant hospital, ordered D, who is not a medical person, to perform a medical practice by ordering D, who is not a medical person, to engage in a “landscape East L-Pib Holdings”, which is a medical practice, against G, who is an in-patient who is not capable of meals himself/herself, to conduct a medical practice. (2) Defendant C’s medical corporation in violation of the Medical Service Act of Defendant C, a medical corporation, did not fulfill its duty of care and supervision concerning the relevant business in order to prevent a violation of B, who is an employee’s nursing

B. The lower court’s judgment, based on its stated reasoning, is to have conducted landscape franchising L-Pibing crowdfunding to G on February 12, 2016.