The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In cases where insurance benefits were illegally supplied at a misunderstanding medical institution, despite the application of Article 115(2)5 of the former National Health Insurance Act (amended by Act No. 14084, Mar. 22, 2016) (hereinafter “instant penal provision”), the lower court acquitted the Defendants of each of the instant charges of violating the National Health Insurance Act, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (a fine of KRW 4 million against Defendant A, 6 months of probation, 2 years of imprisonment against Defendant B, 160 hours of community service order against Defendant C, 8 months of probation, 2 years of probation, 160 hours of community service order against Defendant C, 160 hours of community service order, and 10 million won of fine against Defendant D medical consumer cooperatives) is too uncomfortable and unfair (a prosecutor filed an appeal on the date of the first trial of the first trial of the first instance trial of the first instance trial of the first instance trial of the first instance trial on the grounds of misunderstanding legal principles).

was stated.

However, the reasoning of the appeal on February 2, 2017 is to seek the reversal of the lower judgment, as the lower court’s sentencing is too unfilled.

“Inasmuch as the purport of “an unfair assertion of sentencing” is stated, it shall be deemed that the grounds for appeal are also included. 2. Determination

A. The lower court found the Defendants not guilty of the charges of violating the National Health Insurance Act, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

The reasoning of the judgment below is examined in light of the relevant laws and records, and if we look at the following circumstances acknowledged by the records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as argued by the prosecutor.

shall not be deemed to exist.

This part of the prosecutor's argument is without merit.

1) Where a medical care institution claims reimbursement of expenses for medical care benefits to the National Health Insurance Corporation pursuant to Article 47(1) of the National Health Insurance Act, the details to be stated in the statement of expenses for medical care benefits.