The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud);

A. The grounds of appeal are as follows. The violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (hereinafter “Special Economic Crimes Act”) is against the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (hereinafter “Special Economic Crimes Act”).

The Defendant is the representative of the Foundation F of a Social Welfare Foundation (hereinafter “instant Foundation”) and the Long-term Medical Care Center G (hereinafter “Medical Care Center”) established under the name of the said Foundation.

While operating the instant foundation and the instant medical care center, the Defendant did not falsely register a private or physical care hospital, or falsely register the working hours of the relevant medical care care center and did not report the number of employees exceeding the prescribed number of the instant medical care center.

According to Article 39(3) of the Act on the Long-Term Care Insurance for the Aged and Article 32 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act and Article 32 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, the Defendant claimed false expenses for benefits to the National Health Insurance Corporation (hereinafter “victim”) without applying a reduction rate based on the vacancy ratio and excess in the prescribed amount and the prescribed number of expenses, etc. as publicly notified by the president of the Ministry of Health and Welfare. From October 2009 to July 2016, the Defendant acquired 2,578,378,320 won from the Victim’s Service in total from 82 times to July 2016.

On the other hand, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged, with the exception of the acquittal part on the grounds as seen below.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly adopted by the court below and the relevant legal principles, the court below did not exhaust all necessary deliberations as alleged in the grounds of appeal and exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules, or calculates the amount obtained by deception in fraud, by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.