beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. The summary of the facts charged shall not run any medical advertisement with a false or exaggerated content;
The Defendant, with the trade name of “E” in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 13th 5th 5th 5th lux, was a doctor operating a sexual surgery and a person subject to imposition, but was not qualified as a sexual surgery. On May 24, 2017, the Defendant’s Internet homepage (hereinafter “E”), even though he/she did not have obtained the qualification of a specialist with sexual surgery, has a commitment to “a medical specialist verified from sexual surgery and origin” satisfactory to 1:1st lived treatment.
“A false medical advertisement stating the word “” has been put on.
2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the records of the judgment, i.e., ① the Defendant was working for E’s public relations, ② the Defendant was in charge of the production of the website, the production of information signboards within the hospital, and the production of practical promotional materials. The Defendant’s marking as a medical specialist is limited to one of the Internet homepage. ③ The intention of the instant crime should be based on May 24, 2017, on which the Internet homepage was established. Although the Defendant was going through the process of checking the production of F’s products at the last time, it appears that many documents were transferred to the Defendant, the Defendant confirmed and accepted the part indicated as a medical specialist.
In full view of the fact that it is difficult to see the part on the Internet homepage as a medical specialist, and the part on the Internet homepage as a medical specialist was shown to explain the characteristics of the hospital operated by the defendant, and if the defendant had an intention to make a false advertisement, it is not indicated as a medical specialist, but as a medical specialist on the medical history or the domain screen, it appears that the defendant had an intention to violate the Medical Service Act.
It is difficult to see and otherwise there is no evidence to acknowledge it.
3. In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act is applicable.