The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal did not submit the grounds for appeal within the period for submission of the grounds for appeal. However, on June 10, 2015 and July 1, 2015, the period for submission of the grounds for appeal, the Defendant asserted that the mistake of facts and the grounds for appeal are unreasonable, through each rebuttal received by the court.

On the other hand, the defendant's defense counsel submitted the appellate brief, written opinion, and written summary of oral argument to the court on July 15, 2015, August 19, 2015, and September 18, 2015, when the appellate brief was not timely filed. Thus, the above appellate brief, written opinion, and written summary of oral argument are determined only to the extent that it supplements the grounds for appeal as stated in the above written statement of objections.

The Defendant found the Defendant guilty of each of the charges of this case by misunderstanding the fact, on the following grounds: (a) the hospital facilities of the D Institute, which had received hospital treatment for a long time; (b) the facility of the D Institute, was no longer old and no longer flabed; (c) the facility of the D Institute, which had received hospital treatment, was sent out to a public bath near the victim; (d) the facility of a set-off hospital, was flaging him for a short time; (b) the AB became a bad credit holder; and (c) the body was actually under a part of the Defendant’s credit card; and (d) the facility was not a disease for a long time; and (c) even if necessary, there was no need to receive hospital treatment for a long time; and (d) there was no fact that each of the insurance companies, including the

B. The sentence of imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility in accordance with the spirit of the substantial direct and psychological principle adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act, the existence of credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court is determined in light of the contents of the first instance court’s judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court.