Plaintiff, Appellant

Plaintiff

Defendant, appellant and appellant

National Health Insurance Corporation

Conclusion of Pleadings

April 15, 2009

The first instance judgment

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2008Guhap9249 decided Nov. 19, 2008

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Purport of claim

The defendant confirmed that the part of the other collection demand notice of KRW 1,10 on February 6, 2007 among the other collection demand notice of KRW 1,186,10 on September 8, 2008, among the other collection demand notice of KRW 3,207,930 on April 13, 2007, excluding KRW 14,380,000, excluding KRW 3,207,930, excluding KRW 14,380, 200, 3,000 on August 11, 2008, 1,3, 1, and 3, the corresponding part of the other collection demand notice of KRW 1,33,00 on September 8, 2008 (Omission 3), the corresponding part of the pertinent collection demand notice of KRW 1,166, 710, and 7,000.

Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The reasoning for the court's reasoning is as follows: (a) No. 4, 5, and 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter "the court of first instance") stated that "the plaintiff issued a separate prescription against the medicine expenses to be included in the medical care benefit cost in the case of the patients who were hospitalized in the disease group, and demanded them to claim medicine expenses from the pharmacy." This constitutes "the case where the plaintiff received the insurance benefit cost by deceit or any other wrongful means" under Article 52 (1) of the National Health Insurance Act, and thus, should be collected as unjust enrichment. Thus, the defendant's recovery disposition of this case and the collection disposition of this case are legitimate." Thus, it is consistent with the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case where "the defendant's recovery disposition of this