Defendant

Defendant

Park Sang-hee

Attorneys Kim Yong-dae (Korean)

Busan District Court Decision 2011 High Court Decision 611 Decided July 14, 2011

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

The Defendant’s instant written treatment is based on the crypology and the main science of the crypology and, inasmuch as hypology and the hypology, hypology and hypology were administered by using hypology equipment pursuant to the hypology doctrine, it constitutes an oriental medicine practice included in the scope of license of an oriental medicine doctor. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on oriental medicine treatment, thereby convicting the Defendant

2. Determination

A. Criteria for determination

Article 2(2)1 of the Medical Service Act provides that “A doctor’s duty is to provide medical treatment and provide guidance for health,” and Article 2(2)3 of the same Act provides that “A doctor shall be assigned to oriental medical treatment and guidance for health, oriental medical treatment.” Article 27(1) of the same Act provides that “no person, other than a medical person, shall provide medical treatment, and no medical person, shall provide any medical treatment other than licensed medical treatment.” However, in determining whether a specific act constitutes oriental medical treatment, the determination of whether a specific act constitutes oriental medical treatment should be made in light of social norms by taking into account the purpose of the Medical Service Act, the relevant provisions related to medical treatment, the specific purpose of medical treatment, and the form of medical treatment, etc., and the determination of whether a certain medical treatment constitutes an oriental medical treatment act should be based on where the relevant medical treatment is based on academic principles.

B. Whether the act constitutes an oriental medical practice

As the defendant asserts, it is deemed that the instant writing practice constitutes an oriental medical practice in accordance with the oriental medical principle.

(6) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant’s primary purpose of using dynasium to dynasium treatment is only to improve the overall appearance of crynasium treatment with dynasium, such as dynasium treatment by using dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium and dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium treatment.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.

Judges Lee Jong-il (Presiding Judge)