1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Details of the disposition

A. The Plaintiff, as a medical specialist in the extracurricular medicine, is serving in C Hospital established and operated by a school juristic person B (hereinafter “instant hospital”).

B. On December 31, 2016, the 12-year-old patients D (hereinafter “the instant patients”) had been diagnosed as meat as a result of the preliminary reading by the plenary session of the BT prosecutor of the instant hospital and discharged the instant patients from the hospital upon prescribing drugs.

C. The medical personnel of the instant hospital determined that acute impulse infection is doubtful as a result of the instant CT prosecutor’s final reading, and that on January 1, 2017, the medical personnel conducted an operation for hydropaculous medication by having the instant patient hospitalized.

The guardians of the instant patients heard explanations about the details and risks of the surgery and signed the surgery agreement, etc. by designating the doctor's and the doctor's book as the Plaintiff.

On January 1, 2017, the shock control surgery for the instant patient was performed by E, which was located in the area of the U.S. Hospital in the instant hospital.

(hereinafter “the instant surgery”). After the surgery, the instant patient transferred to the F hospital due to the occurrence of a pelvisec, pelvisec, etc. while being treated in a general hospital after the surgery.

E. On January 1, 2017, the Defendant recognized the Plaintiff’s designation of the instant surgery as the doctor’s and the doctor’s intention to perform the surgery on behalf of the Plaintiff without prior consent or explanation. On June 26, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition of suspending qualification for the Plaintiff on the ground that such an act constitutes a non- moral treatment under Article 66(1)1 of the Medical Service Act and Article 32(1)2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Medical Service Act, which constitutes “when the Plaintiff severely undermines the medical personnel’s dignity.”

(hereinafter “Disposition of this case” (hereinafter “Disposition of this case”). (No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2 (including a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 7, and the purport of the entire pleading as to whether the disposition of this case is legitimate or not is legitimate).