A. In order to treat diseases, the Defendant was hospitalized at the DD Council at the time of original adjudication, and there was no false hospitalization by means of document processing as if he was hospitalized even though there was no need to undergo hospital treatment.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below (two years of suspended sentence in October) is too unreasonable.

2. The defendant asserts that the judgment of the court below is the same as the reasons for appeal in this part of this part, and the court below rejected the above argument on the grounds of various circumstances as stated in its decision. In light of the records and a thorough examination of the judgment of the court below, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just and acceptable, and the court below stated that "F who actually operated DD Council members was under the police investigation and "the defendant was living outside the hospital after he had been hospitalized" (Evidence No. 357 of the evidence record). In the court of the court below, there was a false patient who was conducted only the procedure of hospitalization in D Council members and did not actually receive medical treatment."

D The reason why the defendant memorys the defendant, although there were several patients in the D Council members, is because the defendant raised a lot of disputes with I who was hospitalized and was the president at the time of the opening of the D Council members around March 201.

I tried to control the patient's outing and staying out, and the defendant discussed a lot of complaints about them and argued with I, so the defendant's face is memory.

Although the Defendant was hospitalized, the Defendant received medical treatment by suffering from his/her clothes despite being hospitalized.

The Defendant is from November 5, 201 to December 5, 2011, and from December 6, 201 to January 9, 2012.