beta
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.07.09 2013구합63612

재심판정 취소청구의 소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the decision on retrial;

A. On January 1, 2003, the Plaintiff joined B Hospital (around April 2010, integrated with the Intervenor and its name was changed to “C Hospital”; hereinafter “B Hospital”) and served as the chief of the examination and treatment division of the said hospital from April 28, 2010 to March 5, 2013.

B. On December 21, 2011, the prosecutor of the Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office filed a summary order with the Plaintiff on the charges of preparing a false medical certificate that “A prosecutor prepared a false disability diagnosis report with respect to D, etc. even though “D, E, F, G, H, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, N, andO did not have any disability of at least Grade IV or higher than Grade VI, or did not have any disability to the degree of disability.” On January 6, 2012, the Seoul Central District Court notified the Plaintiff of a summary order of KRW 10 million against the Plaintiff.

(2011 High Court Decision 37682). The Plaintiff appealed to this and filed an application for formal trial on February 2, 2012.

C. On June 12, 2012, the Seoul Central District Court rendered a judgment of innocence against the Plaintiff.

(2012 High 443) A prosecutor appealed against this, and the appellate court (Seoul Central District Court 2012No2080) on January 11, 2013 "E," H, I, J, N, N, or O for the following reasons:

I prepared a false disability diagnosis report with respect to it.

"A guilty of the facts charged and sentenced to a fine of KRW 7 million to the Plaintiff."

hereinafter referred to as "criminal judgment of this case" is the criminal judgment of this case.

(1) On January 14, 2013, the Plaintiff appealed against the instant criminal judgment.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the trial court, ① the Plaintiff’s explanation that it was true that the Plaintiff would give rise to the disability grade to the patients with high possibility of being judged as Grade 4-6 if there are other doctors, and ② the co-offender P, who arranged the issuance of a disability diagnosis certificate to the Plaintiff and arranged the issuance of the disability diagnosis certificate to the Plaintiff, shall be deemed to be the first one by the investigative agency.