All
| TITLE | 【Syllabus of Latest Opinion】 Supreme Court en banc Decision 2021Do15611 Decided May 21, 2025 【Violation of the Medical Service Act】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
| 【Main Issues and Holdings】 [1] Concept of “medical practice” under the meaning of Article 27(1) of the former Medical Service Act, and standards for determining what constitutes such “medical practice” Whether cosmetic tattooing performed by nonmedical personnel constitutes unlicensed medical practice prohibited under Article 27(1) of the former Medical Service Act [2] In a case where the Defendant, a nonmedical practitioner, performed scalp cosmetic tatooing, i.e., scalp micropigmentation, and was indicted for violation of the Medical Service Act on the ground of performing unlicensed medical practice prohibited in Article 27(1) of the former Medical Service Act, the case holding that the lower court judgment erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine in having found the Defendant guilty, even though the Defendant’s tattooing as recorded in the facts charged constitutes ordinary cosmetic tattooing, which does not fall under “unlicensed medical practice” prohibited by Article 27(1) of the former Medical Service Act | |
