The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., a fine of three million won) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. However, the circumstances favorable to the defendant are that the defendant reflects the crime of this case, that the defendant's health as a disabled person of Grade IV with no function as a disabled person of Grade IV, and that the defendant's mother is a disabled person of Grade I at the time of the defendant's old age.

On the other hand, the crime of this case was committed with false diagnosis issued to the administrative agency and submitted it to the administrative agency, and the defendant was involved in the issuance of a false diagnosis certificate as so-called substitute patient in violation of the restrictions on the relevant legal provisions. The crime of this case was committed in a systematic and planned manner by omitting the administrative agency, impairing the order of passenger transport service, thereby violating the order of passenger transport service. The defendant seems to have received a considerable amount of money in return for diagnosis on behalf of a person who intends to transfer an individual taxi, and the defendant has been subject to criminal punishment twice including imprisonment.

In light of the above circumstances and the motive leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the age of the defendant, character and conduct, family relationship, occupation, etc., and the conditions for the sentencing as shown in the arguments and records, there is no change in circumstances that vary in the amount of punishment with the original judgment. In full view of the fact that there is monthly income of a certain amount of monthly income through taxi driving for 30 years with the experience of taxi driving, and that the defendant does not seem to have the ability to pay the fine equivalent to the criminal proceeds, the sentence of the original judgment is too unreasonable, and thus, the defendant's allegation of unfair sentencing is not acceptable.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.