Whether a single comprehensive crime can be deemed a crime solely on the ground that it is a crime expected to be repeated due to the nature of the requirements for constituent crimes (negative)

The reason why several acts falling under the name of the same crime are not punished as multiple crimes and they are punished as a single crime by combining them is that it is reasonable to evaluate the whole of them as one act in the vicinity of the time and place recognized between the acts, similarity of methods, the same opportunity, the continuation of crimes, and other close relation. Thus, it cannot be concluded that the act constitutes a single crime solely on the ground that the act is a crime expected to be repeated due to the nature of the constituent elements of the crime.

Article 37 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Prosecutor

Attorney Kim Ho-young

Seoul High Court Decision 84No1283 delivered on May 16, 1985

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The prosecutor's grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On the grounds of its reasoning, the lower court: (a) established one medical institution by running one member while driving as if the Defendant was an oriental medical doctor in Gangdong-gu Seoul (hereinafter omitted) from September 14, 1983 to October 27 of the same year; and (b) acknowledged the so-called 'a' as guilty of committing an act of oriental medicine with medical appliances and oriental medicine at the above clinic from September 16 to October 27, 1983 for the purpose of profit-making without a doctor's license; and (a) found the so-called 'a' to be guilty of committing an act of violating Article 66 subparagraph 3 and Article 30 (2) of the Medical Service Act for the purpose of violating Article 5 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes; and (b) determined that the Defendant’s act of violating Article 25 of the Medical Service Act for the purpose of violating Article 10 to March 29, 1977 as an all-inclusive summary order with the aim of violating Article 198 of the Medical Service Act.

2. However, the reason why several acts falling under the name of the same crime are not punished as multiple crimes, and it is reasonable to judge the whole as one act because it is reasonable to judge the facts of violation of Article 5 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes, Article 25 of the Medical Service Act, and violation of Article 66 subparagraph 3 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes, and Article 25 (1) of the Medical Service Act cannot be concluded as an inclusive crime solely on the ground that the act is likely to repeat the same act in light of the nature of the constituent elements of the crime, and since the reasoning of the lower judgment and the record reveal that the Defendant committed a violation of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes between December 20, 197 to March 29, 197, as it constitutes an act of violation of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes, which constitutes a single comprehensive crime of violation of the Medical Service Act for the sole reason that the Defendant had been convicted for a more than five-month period of final judgment.

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Yoon Il-young (Presiding Justice) Gangwon-young Kim Young-ju