A. Defendant 1) In fact, the misunderstanding of the legal doctrine and the misunderstanding of the legal doctrine actually needed hospital treatment due to extremely poor health conditions. The Defendant was hospitalized at each hospital according to the doctor’s judgment and received medical treatment. However, the Defendant did not receive hospital treatment for the purpose of deceiving insurance companies and deceiving insurance proceeds.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, observation of protection, and cost of lawsuit) that is unfair in its sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the lower court, in full view of the various circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court in the fourth through sixth page of the lower judgment as to the same purport as the Defendant’s grounds for appeal, can sufficiently be recognized that the Defendant was hospitalized for a long time and received insurance money from the victimized insurance company after receiving payment from the victimized insurance company, even if there was no need for long-term hospitalization

In light of the facts charged, all of the charges of this case were convicted.

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is acceptable, and there was no circumstance to acknowledge that maintaining the first instance court's decision in the first instance court was considerably unfair. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as alleged by the defendant, since it did not appear that the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

B. The amount of money obtained by the defendant as to the improper argument of sentencing by the defendant and the prosecutor has not been restored to the present time.