The judgment below

The part against the Defendants is reversed.

Defendant

B shall be punished by a fine of 20,000,000 won.

Defendant .

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B1) In the instant case, the medical equipment subject to lease actually exists. As such, the instant facts charged are nothing more than that of the Defendant borrowed funds as collateral for the foregoing medical equipment. Of the medical equipment stated in the instant estimate, most of the medical equipment indicated in the instant estimate was purchased from O (hereinafter “O”) or A, etc. from the Defendant, and only part of the Defendant was owned by the Defendant. However, it is reasonable in light of business practices of the industry to request a lease contract and appropriate funds for the cost of equipment of various medical equipment suppliers by one company in the course of delivery to one medical institution. Thus, at the time of entering into a lease contract, deception was committed solely on the ground that the name of the supplier was different from the actual one.

subsection (b) of this section.

B) In addition, the injured company will conduct leasing funds by examining the credit rating, etc. of the defendant and comparing and examining written estimates and medical equipment.

Although the price of high-frequency equipment and cooling equipment supplied by theO among the written estimate of this case is lower than the actual transaction price between theO and the Defendant, the determination of the appropriate purchase price of used medical equipment is a leasing company that concluded a lease contract considering that the market price of used medical equipment and the pertinent price is appropriate for the damaged company. Therefore, there is no relationship between the quotation, etc. presented by the Defendant and the dispositive act of the victimized company.

C) At the time of committing the instant crime, Defendant B did not have a debt in arrears, and had the intent and ability to pay the lease fee under the instant lease agreement, which led to the rehabilitation procedure due to the fact that Defendant B had the intent to commit fraud at the time of committing the instant crime, because it was due to the obligation to be borne by the hospital while operating the hospital.

It is difficult to see it.

(ii)..