beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
Summary of Grounds for Appeal
Despite the absence of the necessity of hospital treatment, the defendant was hospitalized falsely and acquired insurance money from the victim company by deceit.
Nevertheless, the court below judged that it is difficult to see that the defendant was hospitalized falsely, and sentenced not guilty of the facts charged in this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. In a case where continuous observation by a medical personnel is required with respect to side effects or incidental effects of drugs which are very low in resistance to or are administered by the patient's disease, where the management of drugs and drinking foods is needed, the management of drugs and drinking foods is needed and so it is necessary to continuously conduct the administration and treatment of the patient's pains, so that the patient's pains rather inconvenience in treatment, such as where the patient's condition is in a situation where the patient is unable to cope with pain or where the patient's risk of infection exists, etc., and where the patient stays in the hospital, the patient is being provided treatment while staying in the hospital for more than 6 hours pursuant to all the provisions of the "detaileds on the criteria and method for the application of medical care benefits" as a notice of the Ministry of Health and Welfare. However, the determination of whether the patient stays in the hospital room cannot be made based on the patient's symptoms, diagnosis and treatment procedures, and the patient's actions, etc.
B. (Supreme Court Decision 2004Do6557 Decided January 12, 2006, etc.)
According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court and the trial court on this case, it is difficult to determine whether the medical records of the defendant were necessarily required to be hospitalized. However, even if the medical records of the defendant were to be seriously needed to be hospitalized, the court below 1 and the trial court continued to be hospitalized rather than repeated hospitalized treatment.