A. As to the charge No. 1 of the crime list among the charged facts in this case as indicated in the judgment of the court below, the court below found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charge, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, by misunderstanding the fact that the court below acquitted the Defendant of this part of the charge, even though the Defendant was hospitalized for a longer period than the actual necessary period of time, or claimed for insurance money and acquired it by deception, in light of the fact that the Defendant purchased goods from a hospital at 30km away on May 11, 2009, which was 4 days after hospitalization and paid by his credit card, at the hospital on May 11, 2009.

B. As to Defendant 1’s misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, the Defendant’s hospitalization period is appropriate, and even if the Defendant did not have a criminal intent to obtain insurance money, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, in addition to the circumstances of the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant from May 7, 2009 to the same year.

5. From January 7, 2009 to January 24, 2009, he/she was hospitalized in the K Hospital on the grounds of scare scare scare scare scare scare scare scare scare. From November 24, 2009 to November 24, 2009, he/she was hospitalized in the AA periodical department and was hospitalized in scare scare scare scare scare scare scare, etc. for December 14, 2009 to December 16, 2009, after he/she was hospitalized in the AA periodical department, on the grounds of scare scare scare scare scare scare scare scare scare, etc.