1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a person who actually operates a mutual member of the “D Council” (hereinafter “instant hospital”) who employs a doctor B with medical facilities installed in the Gangnam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City C and the second floor to professionally treat patients with chronic renal failure patients.

B. Notwithstanding the fact that the Defendant was not a doctor, and thus cannot be a founder of a medical institution, the Defendant, through B, a doctor on January 6, 201, changed the representative of the instant hospital from E to B from E to B, and had the instant hospital treat blood crypology patients against chronic renal failure patients by March 31, 2012.

(hereinafter “Violation of the Medical Service Act”). C.

As above, the Defendant filed a claim for medical care benefit costs against the Plaintiff after committing a violation of the Medical Service Act, and received total amount of KRW 1,935,113,620 for the period during which the instant hospital was operated by the Plaintiff.

The Defendant was indicted as Seoul Central District Court 2014Kadan2431 due to the instant violation of the Medical Service Act, and was sentenced to a conviction of two years of suspended sentence for one year from the same court on August 7, 2014. The said judgment was finalized on August 15, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The establishment and scope of liability for damages (1) Article 42(1)1 of the National Health Insurance Act limits one of the health care benefit institutions to “medical institutions established under the Medical Service Act” and Articles 33(2) and 66(1)2 of the Medical Service Act limits the qualification of the founder of a medical institution to intent, etc., and prevents a medical person from providing medical services under employment by a person who is unable to establish a medical institution. The purport of the Medical Service Act that limits the qualification of a person who is entitled to establish a medical institution to a certain extent.