However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date of the final judgment.

From August 11, 2006 to July 30, 2010, the Defendant subscribed to 20 insurance products, including “LIG well-being insurance” of the Victim LIG damage insurance company, respectively.

around April 4, 2012, the Defendant pretended to have hospitalized treatment under the name of “C Council member” in Gunsan-si B, which is a minor injury and requires long-term hospitalized treatment, and only for outpatient treatment, even if it is possible to receive hospital treatment. However, around that time, from April 18, 2012 to April 18, 2012, the Defendant deceptioned the victim by claiming insurance money, along with a false certificate of discharge from hospital issued by the said hospital. < Amended by Act No. 11373, Apr. 23, 2012>

The Defendant received KRW 634,830 as insurance money from the victim on April 24, 2012, and received KRW 56,200,654 in total from around that time to August 31, 2015 by the same method as the list of crimes in attached Form 93 times from around that time.

Accordingly, the defendant was informed of the victims and received property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused;

1. Responses to requests for deliberation on the propriety of hospitalization;

1. Details of payment of insurance proceeds;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on medical analysis and advisory data;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence [Scope of Recommendation] There is no basic area (6-100,000 won or less) of Type 1 (6-100,000) (6-16 months) [Pronouncement Decision] Damage caused by insurance fraud [Determination of sentence] Damage from insurance fraud return to a large number of good insurance policyholders. In addition to the instant case, there exist a large number of cases of long-term hospitalization for which the medical record has not been prepared. However, the Defendant’s mistake is against the Defendant