Punishment of Unlicensed Intrusion Acts

An act of aggression is a medical similar act under Article 60 of the Medical Service Act without a license, and if such act constitutes an unlicensed medical act under Article 25 of the same Act (the act of oriental medicine), it shall be punished in accordance with Article 5 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes.

Article 5 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes, Articles 25 and 60 of the Medical Service Act

Supreme Court Decision 77Do2010 Delivered on October 11, 1977

Defendant

Defendant

Daegu High Court Decision 86No118 delivered on July 31, 1986

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In light of the records and comprehensive review of the evidence adopted by the court of first instance as cited by the court below, the fact finding by the court below which found the defendant as a business of giving money to the defendant, is justified, and there is no error of misconception of the facts by misconception of the rules of evidence. The act of aggression as a medical similar act under Article 60 of the Medical Service Act without a license constitutes an act of medical similar act under Article 25 of the same Act, which constitutes a non-licensed medical act under Article 25 of the same Act, and shall be punished pursuant to Article 5 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes (Supreme Court Decision 77Do2010 Decided October 11, 197), and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes.

In addition, the argument that the sentencing of the court below is unfair, unfair, and narrow due to the loss of balance cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal in this case. The arguments are without merit.

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

Justices Yoon Il-young (Presiding Justice)