logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 평택지원 2013.10.10 2012고정803
의료법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who operates the Section C without obtaining a herb doctor's license.

No person other than a medical person shall perform medical practice, and no medical person shall perform any medical practice other than that licensed.

A. On October 14, 2012, at around 14:00, the Defendant: (a) stated that the complainant E (the 71 year old, female) was subject to a long traffic accident in Ansan-si D; (b) and (c) stated that it would be less than 10,000 won of the horses that the complainant would be able to have a good hand; and (c) carried out medical practice by means of taking a variety of 3-7 centimeters of the length of 3-7 centimeters away from 1 hour.

B. Defendant E around 12:00 on November 11, 2012, Defendant 201: (a) the complainant in the above C A.

As in the same paragraph, when visiting a vehicle again after the bed, the complainant was received 30,000 won, and the complainant was carried out a medical act with approximately KRW 3-7 centimeters of length on the head part, shoulder part, and the sloping part.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness E, F and G;

1. Partial statement of the witness H in the court;

1. Part concerning the statement of the E or F in the police interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Article 87 (1) 2 of the Medical Service Act and Articles 27 (1) of the same Act concerning the applicable law and the selection of punishment for a crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion on the claim of the defendant and defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order asserted to the effect that, inasmuch as the defendant's body is different from the defendant's body anywhere and the defendant met E, etc., and that, although not having been affected by E, E filed a complaint with the defendant that he was about to remove money in the name of agreement from the defendant, E would have been invaded, the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence in the judgment, namely, the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the health belt and the evidence in the judgment, i.e., E to which he is a party to be invaded, and the F, to

arrow