The Defendants’ appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (in fact-finding) is as follows: (a) Defendant B instructed the patient to administer drugs in the order of DNA Nos. 1, 1, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, and 0.5, etc. at each time when the Defendant A demanded the patient to reconsipate the patient during the surgery from the patient G prior to the departure surgery for the patient G; (b) Defendant B puts DNA Nos. 1 and 3 in accordance with the direction of the patient.

2. Determination

A. The act of administering a anesthesia injection system, such as a dyspool, requires highly specialized knowledge and clinical experience, and can have a significant impact on the patient's life or body according to various variables, such as the use of medicine, the medication level, and the patient's peculiar physical condition at the time of administration, reaction, and response when an emergency situation occurs. Therefore, it is deemed that it is difficult to predict in advance all the circumstances that can be found at the scene of operation in advance and promise in detail between the doctor and the nurse in advance.

In addition, even if a doctor is a person who has professional knowledge and skills and protects the life and health of a patient under the full trust of a patient and is engaged in medical practice, the medical practice is performed under the responsibility of the doctor, and since the nurse is merely an assistant, it is reasonable to view that it is prohibited under the Medical Service Act that a doctor grants an independent discretion to the nurse in medical practice with a comprehensive prior instruction.

B. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below (Provided, That among the first interrogation protocol prepared by the prosecutor's office against Defendant B, the part denying the actual authenticity in the court below is excluded), only the total amount of drugs to be put into the defendant B prior to the escape operation was designated by the defendant A.