[1] The meaning of "medical act" under Article 25 (1) of the Medical Service Act

[2] The case holding that the act of relaxing the flusor of the flusor of the flusor of the flusor of the blusor of the blusor of the blusor of the blusor of the blusor service by using the blusor and blussor, etc.

[1] The term "medical act" under Article 25 (1) of the Medical Service Act means the act of preventing or treating diseases caused by the diagnosis, autopsy, prescription, medication, or surgical procedure with experience and function based on medical expertise, and other acts that are likely to cause harm to public health and sanitation if performed by medical personnel.

[2] The case holding that the act of relaxing the flusor of the flusor of the flusor of the blusort to customers who appeal the flusor of the blusort in the blusor service industry does not constitute medical practice by taking the flusor and blusor of the flusor, etc

[1] Article 25 (1) of the Medical Service Act, Article 5 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes / [2] Article 25 (1) of the Medical Service Act, Article 5 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public

[1] Supreme Court Decision 86Do749 delivered on July 8, 1986 (Gong1986, 1024), Supreme Court Decision 87Do2108 delivered on December 8, 1987 (Gong1988, 308), Supreme Court Decision 93Do153 delivered on August 27, 1993 (Gong1993Ha, 2683), Supreme Court Decision 94Do89 delivered on April 29, 1994 (Gong194Sang, 1740), Supreme Court Decision 93Do2544 delivered on May 10, 194 (Gong194Sang, 1745), Supreme Court Decision 98Do2481 delivered on March 26, 199 (Gong19859, Sept. 195, 195)

Defendant

Prosecutor

Attorney Go Jong-hee

Jeju District Court Decision 9No152 delivered on September 15, 1999

The appeal is dismissed.

With respect to the facts charged against the defendant in violation of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes, the "medical act" under Article 25 (1) of the Medical Service Act refers to the act of preventing or treating diseases caused by diagnosis, autopsy, prescription, medication, or surgical surgery with the experience and function based on medical expertise, and other act that may cause harm to public health and sanitation if performed by the medical personnel. The court below found the defendant's act not guilty on the ground that the defendant's act is not likely to cause harm to public health and sanitation, and there is no evidence that the defendant's act constitutes "medical act" because it does not constitute "medical act" under Article 25 (1) of the Medical Service Act, in light of its content and function.

In light of the above fact-finding and decision of the court below, it is justified, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or misapprehension of the legal principles, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed as per Disposition.

Justices Cho Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)