The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant was hospitalized for a proper period of time as the actual health is not good, and there was no deception by the victim insurance company, and there was no intention to commit fraud of insurance money.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Fact-finding 1) In a case where continuous observation by a medical personnel is required in relation to side effects or incidental effects of drugs which are very low in resistance to, or are administered by, a patient’s disease, where medication and food need to be continuously conducted, and thus, the patient’s pains rather inconvenience in treatment is caused, or where the patient’s condition is unable to cope with, or where there is a risk of infection, etc., the patient suffers from treatment while staying in the hospital. As such, according to all the provisions of the “Detailed Matters on the Standards and Method for Application of the Care Benefits”, the Public Notice of the Ministry of Health and Welfare (Public Notice of the Ministry of Health and Welfare), the patient’s stay in the hospital for at least six hours, and thus, the patient is treated under the observation and management of the medical personnel. As such, the patient’s symptoms, diagnosis and treatment of the patient, the details and circumstances of the patient’s behavior, etc., as well as the case where the patient’s substance does not need to be hospitalized.

The act of claiming insurance money by asserting that the insurance company met the hospitalization period stipulated in the insurance contract without notifying the case of a long-term hospitalization more than necessary to mislead the insurance company, constitutes a deception in fraud (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do6557, Jan. 12, 2006) (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do6557, Jan. 12, 2006).