The sentence of punishment against the Defendants shall be suspended.

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant B

A. On August 17, 2013, the Defendant: (a) was a doctor operating “G women’s organ” hospital in Ulsan-gu F; (b) was entrusted by pregnant women H with abortion surgery at the above hospital; and (c) was discharged out of the mother’s body by using a tool in the operating room at the operating room; and (d) was born by a approximately five (5) fetus in the womb.

B. On December 7, 2013, the Defendant was entrusted with abortion surgery by pregnant or nursing women I at the foregoing hospital, and was discharged out of the mother body a approximately 6 week fetus in the womb by using implements at the operating room.

2. The Defendant: (a) was a doctor operating a hospital for “Asan Women’s Child” in Ulsan-gu J; (b) was commissioned by the foregoing hospital from K on October 4, 2013 from pregnant or nursing women K to undergo abortion operations; and (c) was discharged out of the mother body by using a tool in the operating room at that place; and (d) was discharged from the mother body.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each protocol concerning suspect interrogation of the police to I, H, and K;

1. Article 270 (1) and (4) of the Criminal Act relating to the facts constituting an offense;

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

1. The type to be suspended;

(a) Defendant A: Imprisonment for four months and suspension of qualifications for one year;

(b) Defendant B: Imprisonment for six months and suspension of qualifications for one year; and

1. Article 59(1) of the Criminal Code of the Suspension of Sentence (the defendants are against the defendant's wrong recognition, and the operation of this case is an embryo between 5-6 weeks in pregnancy and appears to be upon the request of a pregnant woman in an unmarried state. The right to self-determination of a pregnant woman in an early pregnancy should also be considered in determining the possibility of criticism against the defendants' act)