The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In a case where only a false statement is made in the name of medical examination and treatment records, it does not constitute “a false statement in the medical records” under Article 22(3) of the Medical Service Act.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 300,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The defendant alleged the same purport in the judgment of the court below, and the court below rejected the above argument in detail in the "decision on the defense counsel's assertion" column. In light of the records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there are no errors in the misapprehension of legal principles as alleged by the defendant. Thus, the defendant's assertion in the misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

B. The fact that the Defendant had no record of criminal punishment prior to the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, the recognition of the crime of this case and reflects the wrongness, and the fact that only the preparation of the medical records is false and the content is not a false statement, are favorable to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is a case in which the defendant prepared a medical record in the name of another person, and the nature of the crime is not weak, and the crime of violation of the Medical Service Act requires strict punishment in light of the legislative purpose of the Medical Service Act that intends to protect and promote the health of the people, and the court below seems to have determined punishment by fully considering the favorable circumstances of the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, etc. as well as the various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable and inappropriate. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the defendant.