사기
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
1. On March 20, 200, the Defendant was diagnosed as “new absence on the left-hand side” as a result of the first-wave test at D Hospital around February 10, 2003. Around February 10, 2003, D Hospital was diagnosed as “new head and required officer’s absence” as a result of the first-wave test at D Hospital; from around 2001 to 2002, the Defendant was suffering from “mane infection” in both knenee while receiving treatment such as physical therapy, and received treatment for a long period of time. However, the Defendant was aware of the fact that the notice of such knee would be refused from the insurance company, and was willing to receive insurance proceeds by receiving an operation and claiming insurance proceeds.
On March 4, 2005, the Defendant, without notifying the victim interesting life insurance company of the foregoing scopic force, subscribed to the Defendant’s scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic sche
Then, on May 24, 2006, from around June 1, 2006 to around June 1, 2006, the Defendant received surgery and hospitalization on “the left-hand new card” from the Hospital of the Korea University Medical Center, and then filed a claim with the victim for the payment of the insurance money around June 5, 2006, and received KRW 2,450,000 as the insurance money from the victim around June 8, 2006.
The Defendant, including this, obtained a total of KRW 103,432,717 in the same way from the damaged person to July 17, 2012 through 18 times from June 8, 2006 to July 17, 2012 as indicated in the list of crimes of insurance money A, and acquired it by fraud.
2. Although the defendant's assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel was diagnosed as a new absence on the left side at the D Hospital around March 20, 200, and received a diagnosis as a result of extension and absence at the same hospital around February 10, 2003, there was no fact of receiving treatment after the diagnosis, hospitalization, surgery, medication, etc., and therefore, the above diagnosis was conducted by the insurance company in accordance with the insurance contract.