Whether a non-medical person violates the Medical Service Act by employing a qualified medical person and establishing a medical institution in his/her name.

The act of reporting the establishment of a medical institution under the name of a qualified medical person by investing necessary funds by the general public who is not qualified as a medical person, is in conflict with Article 30 (2) of the Medical Service Act, since it is the most formally through the establishment of a lawful medical institution, and there is no reason to regard it differently by directly performing medical practice by a medical person who is a reporter of the establishment.

Article 30(2) and Article 66 subparag. 3 of the Medical Service Act

Supreme Court Decision 81Do3227 Delivered on December 14, 1982

Defendant

Defendant

Chuncheon District Court Decision 87No40 delivered on August 13, 1987

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The act of reporting the establishment of a medical institution under the name of a qualified medical person by investing necessary funds in the general public who is not qualified as a medical personnel is deemed to be a lawful establishment of a medical institution only formally but only through the process of establishing a medical institution by a person who is not a medical personnel. Therefore, it does not seem to be contrary to Article 30(2) of the Medical Service Act, and there is no reason to deem otherwise that the medical person, who is the title holder, directly engaged in the medical act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 81Do3227, Dec. 14, 1982). In the same view, the judgment of the court below is correct and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles, such as the theory of lawsuit.

We cannot accept the conclusion of the judgment of the court below in its independent opinion.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Choi Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)