Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On July 17, 2014, the Defendant: (a) instructed F, an employee, to provide electricity treatment using heat and interference therapy to patients under his/her name, as an oriental medical doctor, who is in the wife population D; and (b) instigated F, according to the above instruction, a non-medical person to provide heat treatment, etc.; and (c) instigated F, as a matter of course, non-medical personnel to provide medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the video CD-related Acts and subordinate statutes

1. Article 87 (1) 2 and Article 27 (1) of the Medical Service Act, Article 31 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 31 (1) of the same Act concerning criminal facts, the selection of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion of the provisional payment order under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant asserts that the F’s act, which is the principal offender, constitutes an act that provides for medical technicians (medical technicians, etc.) to be allowed under the Medical Technicians, etc. Act during medical practice, F and the Defendant should be subject to the Medical Technicians, etc. Act, not the Medical Service Act.

However, Article 1-2 subparag. 1 of the Medical Technicians, etc. Act provides that “A medical technician means a person engaged in medical treatment or medical examination under the instruction of a medical doctor or dentist.” In the case of a herb doctor, unless a medical doctor has a medical doctor’s license or dentist’s license, there is no right to instruct a medical technician (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do2534, Jan. 13, 201). In this judgment, even if a herb doctor had a medical doctor holding a license for physical therapy to provide oriental medical treatment, he/she is deemed to have committed a crime of non-licensed medical practice.

In the case of a defendant who is an oriental medical doctor, it is difficult to be subject to the Act on Medical Technicians, etc., and the act of F, which is a principal offender, is defined as one of the act of medical technicians under the Act on Medical Technicians, etc