The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,200,00.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding and legal doctrine 1) The main text of Article 89 and Article 17(1) of the Medical Service Act provides for punishing “a doctor who does not directly examine a patient” to prepare and deliver a medical certificate under his/her name. Since “a doctor who directly conducted a medical examination of a patient” does not punish another person to prepare and deliver a medical certificate under another person’s name, it is against the principle of clarity of the criminal justice and the principle of prohibition of analogical interpretation.

2) At the time the Defendant started his service at F Hospital, he was operated under the name of the Defendant.

Before the closure of the S Hospital, the F Hospital was unable to issue a medical certificate as a doctor of the F Hospital. As such, the F Hospital’s medical doctor, who was working only at the F Hospital, was under the treatment of kidne, etc. due to chronic renal failure, issued a medical certificate inevitably according to the F Hospital’s request. As such, the Defendant has “a compelling cause” as prescribed in the proviso of Article 17(1) of the Medical Service Act.

3) In light of the fact that the practice of issuing a medical certificate under the name of the president exists even if the medical doctor on duty, etc. at a general hospital, the Defendant actually worked at the F hospital, and theO inevitably delivered a medical certificate at the request of the hospital because it was impossible for the hospital to provide medical treatment as a branch, etc., the Defendant does not constitute a violation of the Medical Service Act.

As such, the mistake constitutes a mistake of law under Article 16 of the Criminal Act, since it constitutes a mistake of law.

B. The lower court’s sentence (1.5 million won in penalty) against an unfair defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

A. Of the facts charged in the instant case, a doctor, dentist, or oriental medical doctor who directly conducted a medical examination or conducted an examination by engaging in the occupation of preparing and delivering a medical certificate with N.