Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of 200,000 won.

Defendant

If A does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A employs Defendant B as an assistant nurse and operates “F Council member” from the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City E and the 13th level.

1. No person, other than Defendant B medical technicians, etc., shall engage in medical technicians, etc.;

Nevertheless, at around 12:00 on April 9, 2014, the Defendant measured the residual waste of the patient G by using the repulpulp pulse diagnostic device, “the ultrapulpulse diagnostic device” under the direction of A, who is a doctor, in the “F Council” as above, over 10 seconds.

2. Defendant A had a nursing assistant, other than a medical technician, perform the duties of medical technicians, etc. at the same time and at the same place as paragraph (1).

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A H statement;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the written accusation;

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

(a) Defendant A: Articles 32, 30(1)1, and 9(1) of the Medical Technicians, etc. Act; selection of fines

B. Defendant B: Articles 30(1)1 and 9(1) of the Medical Technicians, etc. Act; selection of fines

1. Defendant B to suspend the sentence: Fine of 500,000 won;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act (100,000 won per day) of the Criminal Act for the detention in a workhouse;

1. Defendant B of suspended sentence: Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Act (Taking into account the fact that medical technicians, etc. were assigned to perform duties according to the direction of Defendant A, and the first offender, etc.);

1. Defendant A of the provisional payment order: the Defendants and the defense counsel’s arguments regarding the Defendants and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act; according to the relevant provisions, the doctors are also allowed to perform the duties of medical technicians; Defendant B asserts that it cannot be deemed as a violation of the Medical Technicians, etc. Act, since he/she performed the duties of medical technicians, etc. using the saf

Article 1-2 subparag. 1 of the Medical Technicians, etc. Act shall be construed as “medical technicians” as “persons engaged in medical treatment or medicine examination under the direction of a doctor or dentist.”