The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (i) The Defendant’s advertisement is not an advertisement on medical treatment prohibited by the Medical Service Act.

D. Article 56(5) of the Medical Service Act and Article 23 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act stipulate medical advertisements prohibited to persons other than medical personnel, but the defendant's advertisement does not constitute medical advertisements prohibited by the above provision.

B. Under Article 82(3) of the Medical Service Act, a Marine is a medical person. In particular, Article 63 applicable mutatis mutandis under Article 82(3) of the Medical Service Act applies mutatis mutandis under Article 56, and the Marine does not constitute “a person who is not a medical person” under Article 56(1).

Dod Ba Mad Mad Mad Mad Mad Mad Mad Mad Mad Mad.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the first medical advertisement, the defendant's advertisement of misunderstanding of facts can be acknowledged as having advertised "I will perform a surgery with all kinds of diseases, such as humph disc, typhal disc, ethalopic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic ethic.)".

Supreme Court Decision 2009Do7455 Decided November 12, 2009