The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. It is difficult to view that hospitalization is unnecessary or excessive in light of the disease, symptoms, etc., which became the cause of hospitalization of the defendant as the gist of the grounds for appeal.

In addition, it cannot be deemed that the defendant intended to be excessively hospitalized in order to receive insurance money, or that there was an awareness about it, so the intention of fraud cannot be recognized.

Nevertheless, there is an error of misconception of facts that the court below recognized that the defendant acquired insurance money through long hospitalization for more than necessary period.

2. In the event of exercise of the right by means of deception, the act belonging to the exercise of the right and the act of deception belonging to the said means shall be comprehensively observed, and if such deception cannot be acceptable as a means of exercise of the right by social norms, the act belonging to the exercise of the right constitutes fraud.

In addition, there are reasons to receive insurance proceeds.

Even if this is done, if excessive insurance money is paid through long-term hospitalization, etc. with intent to acquire a large amount of insurance money than the actual insurance money, a crime of fraud is established against the whole insurance money received.

In light of the following facts and circumstances, the court below’s duly admitted and investigated evidence may be comprehensively admitted (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do4665, May 28, 2009). In light of the following facts and circumstances, the Defendant may recognize the fact that he/she received insurance proceeds by being hospitalized excessively with intent to acquire a large amount of insurance proceeds exceeding the insurance proceeds actually receivable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

The defendant is a family owner who has no economic income, and the husband's income is the amount of KRW 3.5 million per month.

Nevertheless, the Defendant maintained 15 to 2015 insurance policies from around 2009 to 2015, and the total monthly payment premium is approximately KRW 950,000 as of December 2015.