2014No150 Fraudulent

A person shall be appointed.

Defendant

Kim Su-hee (Lawsuits) and Choi Ho-hee (Trial)

Law Firm (Caution), Law Firm Don, Attorney Kim-hu, and Cho Il-kon

Seoul Western District Court Decision 2013Ma433 Decided January 24, 2014

September 25, 2014

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal;

B Convalescent was supplied with food materials by X, Inc. C (hereinafter referred to as "C")

In addition, there has not been entrusted with the operation of the restaurant, and directly operated the restaurant at the hospital, and the nutrition of the restaurant.

Inasmuch as the employees of the hospital employed by the private and cooking hospital are those of the hospital, additional charges, dietitians' additional charges, and

There is no fact of deceiving the National Health Insurance Corporation in relation to the claim for objection, additional dues and selective amount of additional dues.

2. Summary of the facts charged

The Defendant, on March 3, 2008, established and operated a B convalescent in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on March 3, 2008.

the principal of the hospital, through a deputy governor, who is under his control at the B convalescent Office;

When concluding a contract for the supply of food materials with X representative director of the food company C (hereinafter referred to as "C") and the Gu in B convalescent

C operated by X for the salaries, etc. of employees, such as dieticians, cooks, etc. under the jurisdiction of the restaurant;

The Court decided to bear the burden.

Accordingly, X is reported on the salaries of employees belonging to B/L cafeterias and the operating expenses of cafeterias.

personnel education shall be conducted separately in C, and the expenses for the management of the restaurant shall be paid directly to the employees.

(1) In the case of a B/C care hospital in which employees are formally provided with incentives to employees, etc.

Although it comes into existence, considering the aspects of wages, management, etc., the action of B/C care hospital is practically taken into account.

trustee, not directly operated by a cafeteria, but operated in the form of a consignment operation.

Despite the fact that the Defendant had been in charge of B/C care hospital on March 3, 2008, the Defendant was in charge of B/C care hospital.

He/she directly manages the completion by using the fact that a dietitian or a cook is formally under the jurisdiction of a hospital.

of the victim, as if the victim operates an internal restaurant, a cook, a dietitian, and a selective type;

claim additional charges on a direct charge, and the charge shall be from the victim to the bank account in the name of the defendant.

54, 960 won was remitted.

Accordingly, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and sent KRW 54,960 as a food surcharge.

Between March 2008 and January 201, 2012, the list of offenses listed in the judgment of the court below as well as the money received;

A total of 425, 131, 630 won was remitted over 47 times, such as the statement in the list.

3. Determination

Where a medical care institution directly operates a cafeteria, it shall pay an additional charge directly to the medical care institution and full-time employees under its jurisdiction.

Nutrition, additional charges, cooking charges, selective charges and additional charges according to the existence and number of dietitians and cooks.

the purpose of the system that allows each payment to be made under the direct management of the personnel and facility management that are anticipated to be made under the direct management;

in the case of operating a trustee company, in consideration of the increased amount of expenses

to preserve additional expenses, etc., so that dietitians and cooks may appear in appearance.

Even if it appears that it belongs to a hospital which is a medical care institution, it is substantially operated by the consignment method.

If it is not deemed to meet the requirements for the above additional charges, it shall not be deemed to meet the requirements for the above additional charges.

Taking into account the following circumstances found by evidence duly admitted and investigated:

B Convalescents shall be entrusted to C with the operation of the cafeterias, and C shall have the dietitians and cooks of the cafeterias.

Defendant, the president of the above hospital, who is clear that the cafeteria was operated in a qualitative direction and supervision; and

The person, as the above hospital directly operated the cafeteria, deceiving the victim and, additional charges, etc.;

Since it is sufficient to recognize the fact that he received, the judgment of the court below with the same conclusion is just.

There is no error of misconception of facts.

(a) Food materials delivery contracts concluded between a hospital and C, notwithstanding their names, shall be in substance;

the agreement on the operation of a restaurant constitutes an entrustment contract. In other words, the content of the agreement is a food for Ca Hospital.

A re-delivery shall be supplied, and the price of supplied goods shall be KRW 3,300, and KRW 2,000,000, for employees-type 1 restaurant.

In addition, the total amount of meals multiplied by the total number of meals for a month, shall be a cafeteria, a cook, a cook,

-4 major insurance premiums for Rigs, all benefits, including retirement allowances, for the benefit of the Rigs, for the remainder, for the heat of water, for the heat of water;

All management expenses, such as cost of expendable goods, shall be borne by C, and the hospital shall bear the expenses.

The amount after deducting all the benefits from the total amount shall be paid to C, and all the management expenses shall be paid to C, the head of the nutrition office,

Through this, direct disbursement was made.

However, C does not directly supply food materials to the hospital, and C is under the direction and supervision of C.

After the head of the nutrition office prepares a meal group, he/she directly orders food materials suppliers, such as CJ, to conduct inspections;

The price was paid by C to the supplier.

As a result, C does not receive the supply price of food materials from the hospital, but the total amount of food materials (this is light).

from a video perspective C’s gross sales and personnel expenses and food materials purchase expenses;

Amount after deducting all expenses, such as management expenses, from operating income (the total amount of food is more than the total amount of expenses);

w) A business loss (if the total food is less than the total food cost) was incurred or showed only the business loss.

(Evidence Record No more than 292 monthly sales status, etc.) 1), profits and losses arising from the management of a cafeteria;

c) was reverted to C, and the hospital substantially bears any expenses incurred in the management of the cafeteria;

Since its sales have been paid to C in full, there is no result of the management of the cafeteria.

additional charges, such as direct charges and additional charges, which are not directly affected by the victim

Only acquisition was made.

B. C. With respect to the salaries of staff members belonging to the hospital restaurant, the C shall directly pass each month from the hospital’s office.

The status of the employee's retirement, such as leave, through the head of the nutrition office, etc., shall be reported to the employee, and the employee shall be employed.

Matters concerning personnel and labor, such as granting incentives and providing education to employees;

of the management, the head of the nutrition office, etc. shall receive reports on the operation expenses, etc. of the restaurant and approve the disbursement, and

In light of the fact that the cafeteria employees were paid to the contact employees, the cafeteria employees are formally hospital centers.

receiving benefits from the hospital, but actually receiving benefits from C

It is reasonable to view that he/she had worked in accordance with the direction and supervision thereof (as alleged by the defendant).

If the employees of the cafeteria, such as this dietitian, were affiliated with the hospital and C was not involved in the management of the hospital;

In the absence of the supply of food materials (as seen earlier, through the Director of the Nutrition; hereinafter referred to as “the Disposition”).

C only received money in the name of the cost of food materials from a hospital on the ground of Donson’s Alternative ground

whether or not an explanation is made).

4. Conclusion

Thus, the appeal by the defendant is without merit and it is ordered in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

shall be decided as above.

Judges Han-young

Judges Senior Jin-jin

Judges Kim Jong-ok

1) The Defendant’s total food costs consisting of food materials expenses, personnel expenses, management expenses, etc., and the balance after deducting personnel expenses and management expenses.

Therefore, the case where the hospital pays it to C and the case where the food material cost is separately paid is only different from the calculation method, and the substance is in substance.

Although it is alleged to be the same, the sum of food materials expenses, personnel expenses, and management expenses is only the total amount of expenses, not the total amount of food expenses, which is the total sales.