The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles) appears to have received hospitalized treatment by designating a discharge day in accordance with the schedule of the school in which the Defendant is working, training, etc. This seems to be an exceptional case in light of the ordinary method in which the discharge day of the patient is determined according to the decision of the doctor in charge. However, in full view of the following circumstances, the credibility of L’s “Analysis and Medical Advice Data (Evidence No. 17-25)” and the medical analysis report (Evidence No. 69) prepared by M (Evidence No. 69) is high, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of the instant case, even though the Defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact of receiving insurance money by false or exaggerated hospitalization, by misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting

2. The lower court rendered a not guilty verdict on the facts charged of this case on the ground of the circumstances indicated in its reasoning in the judgment (No. 10 to No. 6). In so doing, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the charges of this case on the following grounds: (a) the need for admission may vary depending on the patient’s health condition and situation at the time of hospitalization; and (b) the need for admission may vary depending on the patient’s health condition

In addition, the examination and treatment of the defendant's hospitalization and the observation of progress based on the medical judgment of the doctor in charge.

It is reasonable to see that this should be respected unless there are any special circumstances (as claimed by a prosecutor, the defendant was hospitalized after designating the date of discharge in advance.

(2) In the medical record, there is no circumstance that the defendant complained of false symptoms to the doctor in charge in order to receive insurance proceeds, unilaterally requested hospitalized treatment while exaggerationing the symptoms, or continued hospitalized treatment without disregarding the recommendation of discharge from the doctor in charge.