The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles) as to this case’s issues, and this case’s Dan Man Man Man Mana, etc., constitutes medical practice, and thus becomes subject to entry in the record of medical treatment, the lower court determined that the above procedure was not a medical practice and rendered a not-guilty verdict.

2. Determination

A. In a relevant criminal trial, the recognition of facts constituting an offense ought to be based on strict evidence of probative value, which makes the judge sure that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof is not sufficiently enough to the extent that the defendant’s assertion or defense is inconsistent, or unreasonable, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant even if there is suspicion of guilt, such as the defendant’s non-competence, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1487, Apr. 28, 2011). Medical practice refers to the act of preventing or treating a disease by conducting a medical examination, autopsy, prescription, medication, or surgical treatment, and other acts that may cause harm to health, unless performed by a medical person (see Supreme Court Decision 98Do2481, Mar. 26, 199).

As such, the purport of allowing a doctor to prepare a register of medical treatment is to make accurate records to a doctor in charge of medical treatment without omitting information about the patient's condition and progress of medical treatment, allowing the doctor to continue to use the records for patient treatment, and also provide other persons engaged in medical treatment with such information.