The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10 million.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal in this case’s sentencing conditions, the sentence (a fine of KRW 5 million, an additional surcharge of KRW 20 million) declared by the court below is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Examining the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, the following circumstances are favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant appeared to reflect his mistake while committing the instant crime; (b) the medical corporation D Foundation agreed with the side of the medical corporation D Foundation; (c) the above medical corporation wanted to have the Defendant’s wife; and (d) the Defendant was in a situation where the health was not improved due to the fall accident around June 2014 due to the fall accident.

However, on the other hand, the crime of this case was committed upon the request of the defendant from persons related to the convalescent to obtain a loan of hospital assets as security, and it was under the pretext of obtaining the approval from the competent authority with respect to the above loan. The crime of this case is not less than 20 million won, and the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor on September 24, 2008 with prison labor for the crime of fraud, rape, attack, etc. at the Busan High Court, and released on December 11, 201. Nevertheless, the defendant committed the crime of this case without his knowledge, and the defendant was arrested for about 10 months without a request from the investigative authority upon the commencement of the investigation into this case, and was arrested for about 10 months after the escape, taking into account the various sentencing conditions stated in the argument of this case, such as the character and environment of the defendant, family relationship, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., it is deemed that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's ground of appeal disputing unfair sentencing is with merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

[New reasoning of the judgment of the court below] The summary of criminal facts and evidence is stated in this court.