The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three months.

Defendant

A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A’s sentence (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The analysis of the medical records on Defendant B prepared by the misunderstanding of the facts (Defendant B) (hereinafter “Defendant B”) may be sufficient evidence to support the fact that the Defendant did not properly undergo the hospitalization in the medical records prepared when the nurse was actually hospitalized in the process of considering the fact that the Defendant’s medical records were inappropriate. In light of the doctor G’s statement and medical advice, the Defendant did not need any specific treatment at the time of the Defendant’s hospitalization and did not seem to have any situation in need of long-term hospitalization after the surgery. In addition, considering the Defendant’s part of the Defendant’s investigation agency’s statement or the relevant circumstances on F hospital, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant was hospitalized even if there was no need for hospitalization, or that the Defendant acquired the insurance proceeds by receiving a long-term hospitalization exceeding the need.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The lower court’s punishment against Defendant A is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination as to the assertion of misunderstanding the fact (Defendant B’s part 1) of this part of the facts charged, the Defendant subscribed to multiple insurance policies for which hospitalization insurance money is paid when hospitalized due to disease, and was able to receive insurance money by repeatedly hospitalized in a way that rehospitalizes the patient immediately after discharge, even though it was a sufficient disease due to hospital treatment, as if it were a serious disease that requires long-term hospitalized treatment.

On September 29, 2011, the Defendant was hospitalized in the F Hospital located in Kimhae-si, Kimhae-si, after receiving diagnosis of the opening of the right dog, the influence of the fluence of the flusium and the flusence of the flusium.

This fact is 5 days immediately after the release on September 24, 201.