The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The motion for adjudication on the constitutionality of the instant case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) Article 27(1) main text of Article 27(1) of the Medical Service Act (amended by Act No. 10579, Apr. 12, 201) and the former part of Article 27(1) of the Medical Service Act (amended by Act No. 8366, Apr. 11, 2007) (hereinafter “the instant provision of the Medical Service Act”) among Article 5(1) of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes (amended by Act No. 10579, Apr. 12, 2011); and (b) Article 27(1) main text of the Medical Service Act (amended by Act No. 8366, Apr. 11, 2007) are unconstitutional.

2. The legal provisions of this case, which judged the appeal, cannot be deemed as unconstitutional as stated in the latter, and the defendant's assertion is without merit.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

3. Determination on a request for an adjudication on the constitutionality of a law

(a) Article 27 of the Medical Service Act (amended by Act No. 8366 of Apr. 11, 2007) (1) No person, other than a medical person, shall perform any medical practice, and no medical person shall perform any medical practice other than those licensed.

Provided, That a person who, in violation of Article 27 of the Medical Service Act, commits any of the following acts for the purpose of profit-making in violation of Article 5 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes (hereinafter omitted) (amended by Act No. 10579, Apr. 12, 201) shall be punished by imprisonment for life or for at least two years:

In such cases, a fine not less than one million won but not more than ten million won shall be imposed concurrently.

1. Engaging in medical practice by a person who is not a doctor;

B. The purport of the petitioner’s assertion is that the legal provision of this case violates the principle of clarity of the criminal justice, and infringes on the freedom of occupation of non-medical persons in violation of the excessive prohibition principle, thereby violating the Constitution.

(c)

Judgment

(1) The term “medical practice” under Article 27(1) of the Medical Service Act as to whether the principle of clarity violates the principle of clarity of the crime-based statutoryism is based on medical expertise.