logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1989. 1. 10. 선고 88도1896 판결
[보건범죄단속에관한특별조치법위반][공1989.2.15.(842),257]
Main Issues

The meaning of "medical act as business" under Article 5 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes.

Summary of Judgment

"A person who is not a dentist" under Article 5 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes refers to not only a case where a person who has not a dentist has continuously performed dental treatment but also a case where a doctor has repeatedly performed dental treatment.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 5 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes

Escopics

Defendant

upper and high-ranking persons

Defendant

Defense Counsel

Attorney Kim Tae-tae

Judgment of the lower court

Busan High Court Decision 88No394 delivered on September 15, 1988

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The forty days of detention days prior to the imposition of judgment after an appeal shall be included in the imprisonment of the original judgment.

Reasons

As to the Grounds of Appeal:

Article 5 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes provides dental services to a person who is not a dentist on January 1, 200 shall be limited to only one of the cases where dental treatment is performed continuously and repeatedly, as well as the cases where dental treatment is performed continuously and repeatedly. However, according to records, the fact-finding by the court below that the defendant, other than a dentist, is engaged in dental treatment as a business, such as finding out the b0,000 won of treatment fees at the defendant's house with a dental appliances and cutting down the body of Nonparty 20,000, is acceptable, and the defendant shall not be deemed to have provided medical services once every opportunity.

In addition, the court below's disposition of forfeiture of seized articles is just and there is no error in this regard.

Ultimately, the appeal is dismissed, and part of the number of days pending trial is included in the imprisonment with prison labor of the original court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Kim Yong-ju (Presiding Justice)

arrow