Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

Punishment of the crime

No person, other than a doctor directly engaged in the medical service, shall prepare a medical certificate, death certificate, or prescription and deliver it to the patient.

The Defendants conspired to directly examine and issue the prescriptions for the patients who were diagnosed and prescribed by Defendant A, in the name of Defendant B, and to prepare and deliver them under the name of Defendant B who did not prescribe them.

From August 19, 2013, the Defendants: (a) in the F department located in Si/Gu, Youngwon-si; (b) in the name of Defendant B who directly conducted a medical examination of patients G at the place; and (c) in the name of Defendant B who did not directly examine the said G, the Defendants prepared and issued a prescription for the said G; and (d) from around July 11, 2013, the same year.

8. From the day of February 21, in collusion, as shown in the annexed list of crimes, Defendant B did not directly examine the patient 1,097 in the above manner, and the prescription was prepared and entered in the name of Defendant B with regard to 1,097 patients.

Summary of Evidence

1. The Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement made by the prosecutor and the police involved in H;

1. Each written confirmation of G and I;

1. The current date of preparation;

1. Medical prescriptions for G;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a copy of a prescription of 2,608, issued in the name of Appendix B;

1. The Defendants: Articles 89 and 17(1) of the Medical Service Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, and the selection of fines for negligence

1. Defendants who are subject to aggravated concurrent crimes: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2 and Article 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Determination on the allegations by the Defendants and their defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the assertion was that Defendant A issued a prescription under the name of Defendant B, but the Defendant A directly prepared a prescription after the medical examination and issued it to the patient. As such, Defendant A prepared and issued a prescription to the patient irrespective of the name of the prescription.