logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.01.25 2017고정673
사기
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

D hospital in Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government is a hospital operated normally, such as facilitating entry into, discharge from, and unauthorized going out of, the so-called office hospital, and absence of substantive hospitalized treatment.

The Defendant: (a) was hospitalized in the said D Hospital from March 22, 2016 to April 11, 2016, and claimed insurance proceeds from the said D Hospital for 21 days; (b) however, there was no fact that the Defendant had received a doctor’s medical treatment; and (c) there was no fact that the Defendant had received substantive hospitalized treatment, such as having received medical treatment; (d) as above, the Defendant deceptioned the victims and received KRW 420,000 from the victim on June 13, 2016; and (e) by deceiving the victims by the same method from the time to August 30, 2016; and (e) obtained the total sum of KRW 5,521,657, as shown in the attached Table of Crimes (A), from the time on August 30, 2016.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Copy of each protocol concerning the examination of suspects of the police against E or F;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. Details of response to communications data;

1. Statement of claim for expenses for medical care benefits;

1. Investigation report (verification of the actual conditions of the relevant case and D hospital);

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to data on analysis of tropical table (suspect A);

1. Relevant Article 347 of the Criminal Act and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of fines for the crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (the defendant and defense counsel have a need to be hospitalized;

However, in light of the aforementioned evidence, there was no record of having received medical treatment, such as surgery, before the beginning of the instant crime, and the record of medical treatment received at the time one year has elapsed since the end of the instant crime, there was a need for hospitalization in light of the aforementioned evidence.

As such, it is difficult to see.

arrow