Background
A nursing assistant working at a clinic (our client) was indicted for violation of the Medical Service Act on the basis that extracting a customer's acne amounted to "unlicensed medical practice performed without a physician." Changchun defended the indicted client.
The Issue — Was It "Medical Practice," and Was the Testimony Reliable?
The key questions were ① whether acne extraction constitutes medical practice, such as a "medical examination," and ② whether the victim's (customer's) testimony, on which the prosecutor relied, was reliable.
How Changchun Helped
Changchun (attorney Donghwan Shin) established that ① the customer had in fact simply wanted "acne extraction" and had never been examined for a boil, yet the prosecutor had indicted after selectively picking out only the parts of the customer's account favorable to conviction; and ② simple acne extraction performed without medical equipment is difficult to characterize as a "medical examination" identifying and assessing an affected area (on the meaning of "examination," see Supreme Court 2007Do5531 and 93Do153, among others).
Outcome
Finding the charge unproven, the court acquitted our client (Criminal Procedure Act art. 325, second sentence).
Contesting with precision the boundaries of "medical practice" and the reliability of testimonial evidence can set even an unlicensed medical practice charge right with an acquittal. (Outcomes may differ depending on the facts of each matter.)