The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The lower court’s sentence (one million won of a fine) in the grounds of appeal is deemed to be too unhued and unreasonable.

2. In a case where the money has been acquired by deception through several times against the same victim in a crime of fraud prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal of ex officio judgment, only a single crime of fraud shall be established if the criminal intent is single and the method of crime is identical.

(Supreme Court Decision 2005Do8645 Decided February 23, 2006). The instant fraud committed the instant crime, although the Defendant did not have any actual source of equipment or prescribed medicine, the Defendant provided medical treatment without having any actual effect.

As if medical records or medicine have been prescribed, medical records are prepared and documents related to medical care benefits are submitted, and they are submitted to this, a sum of 42,246,869 won (=31,219,049 won by false prescription fraud amounting to 11,027,820 won by fraud amounting to 11,027,820 won by fraud amounting to 11,027,820 won by fraud amount) as shown in the attached list of crimes (1) and (2) of the judgment of the court below. Although there are some differences in the contents of deception, it shall be deemed that the money has been acquired by the

Therefore, the crime of fraud in this case is deemed to be one comprehensive crime.

Nevertheless, the court below held that the crime of fraud in this case was concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the number of crimes, which affected the conclusion

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the prosecutor's allegation of unfair sentencing, on the ground of the above ex officio reversal, and it is again decided as follows.

[Reasons for the judgment of multiple times] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by this court are all the same as that of each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.