2. Determination

A. In full view of the following facts and circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated, the lower court determined that the instant facts charged was insufficient to deem that the Defendant was falsely or excessively hospitalized from July 22, 2009 to July 21, 2014, and that the Defendant acquired insurance proceeds related to hospitalization from multiple victim insurance companies, and that there was no other evidence to acknowledge the facts.

1) The Defendant subscribed to 18 insurance products from September 7, 1999 to November 28, 2013, and maintained 10 insurance contracts from the time of the occurrence of the instant case. The contract with respect to each of the instant hospitalization was seven insurance products of six insurance companies, and it is difficult to see that the Defendant concluded a collective multiple insurance contracts for the purpose of acquiring insurance proceeds by deceiving the Defendant by committing himself/herself, in light of the date of each of the instant hospitalization and the amount of each subscription. (ii) The data on the analysis of Q Q, which seem to correspond to the facts charged, are written in the opinion of the private company.

This is merely an ex post analysis of the defendant's nursing records, medical records, etc., and it is difficult to see that sufficient judgment data is about the necessity of hospital treatment and the appropriateness of the period of hospitalization for the defendant.

3) The result of the judgment below’s appraisal of medical records, and the RDR’s hospitalization at the Defendant’s D Hospital (from June 22, 2009 to July 6, 2009).