The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the fact-finding or legal principles, the other party to the act indicated in the facts charged of this case by misunderstanding that the defendant's act was not a non-licensed medical practice or was a legitimate act as an act that does not violate social rules and is not a legitimate act, in consideration of the fact that the defendant's act was not a non-licensed medical practice, or that the defendant was merely a non-licensed medical practice.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the legitimate act, or by misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on the assertion of misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine 1) Article 27(1) of the Medical Service Act strictly prohibits non-licensed medical practice by allowing only medical personnel to perform medical practice, and allowing only licensed medical personnel to perform medical practice.

Here, the term "medical practice" means the act of preventing or treating a disease caused by diagnosis, autopsy, prescription, medication, or surgical treatment with experience and function based on medical expertise, and other act that is likely to cause harm to health unless performed by a medical person.

“The possibility of causing harm to health and hygiene if the medical personnel do not perform” is sufficient to be abstractly dangerous, and thus, the patient did not have any danger in detail.

The Supreme Court Decisions 2017Do19422 Decided June 19, 2018; 2010Do5964 Decided May 10, 2012; and 22, 1981.