logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.09.20 2017누80686
환수고지처분 등 취소청구
Text

1. The part against Defendant National Health Insurance Corporation of the first instance judgment regarding KRW 240,908,440 shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a doctor who has operated the C Hospital “C Hospital” (hereinafter “instant hospital”) in Seocho-gu, Busan-si. Mangsan-si.

D is the secretary general of the instant hospital, and the Plaintiff is serving as the president of the instant hospital.

D, a non-medical person, although not a medical person, was unable to establish a medical institution, was able to open and operate a medical institution by lending the name of the doctor together with E, the general director of the instant hospital.

At the end of October 2007, the Plaintiff entered into a business agreement with E, the chief of the diagnosis and treatment division of the instant hospital, to invest KRW 650,000,000,000, and to receive 1/3 of the revenues of the instant hospital, among those who were working as the chief of the department in charge of the same business.

On November 1, 2007, the Plaintiff changed the founder of the instant hospital in his name, and was appointed as the president, and operated the instant hospital along with E and D, a non-medical person.

Accordingly, the plaintiff, in collusion with E and D, required non-medical persons to establish a medical institution.

B. On September 5, 2008, the Suwon District Court recognized the Plaintiff’s criminal facts as violating Article 33(2) of the Medical Service Act, and notified the Plaintiff of a summary order of KRW 7 million (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Da36454, hereinafter “instant summary order”) and the above summary order became final and conclusive.

C. On August 3, 2015, Defendant National Health Insurance Corporation rendered a disposition to recover unjust enrichment of KRW 19,932,416,060, which the instant hospital received from November 1, 2007 to May 31, 2015, on the ground that the instant hospital was operated as the so-called “office-general hospital” (hereinafter “the first restitution disposition”).

On November 24, 2015, the Goyang market revoked the permission for the establishment of the instant hospital as of November 19, 2015, based on Article 64(1) of the Medical Service Act, on the ground that the instant hospital is an office-general hospital established by non-medical persons.

Accordingly, the defendant.

arrow