The judgment below

The guilty part shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

The judgment below

part of acquittal.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) Embezzlement embezzlement (hereinafter “Defendant 1”) (hereinafter “Defendant 2017 Highest 1958”) ① Inasmuch as there is no patient who received medical treatment from the Defendant, the document No. 1 patient column in the attached Table No. 1 of the Criminal List as indicated in the lower judgment does not constitute medical expenses.

② Money deposited into the Defendant’s account at each time and time indicated in [Attachment 2-9] Nos. 2-9 of the crime sight table as indicated in the holding of the court below is only equivalent to the amount of actual Catia, which is a health functional food, not paid for sex surgery or medical expenses.

B) The Defendant did not enter into a contract with the Victim F to operate a cafeteria in the G Care Hospital or receive KRW 195 million from the Victim F to the Defendant. 2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts (not guilty part of the judgment of the court below) does not have the right to use the name plates of each of the instant cases, and even if the Defendant arbitrarily forged T’s signature and forged and used a private document under his name, the court below acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, there is an error of misunderstanding of facts. 2) The sentence imposed by the court below on the Defendant is too una

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances are acknowledged based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as follows: (i) E appears as a witness in the court of the court below to the effect that: (a) was given treatment by the Defendant at the D Hospital at the time of the instant case; and (b) was given notice from the hospital to the account at the time of the instant case; (c) E did not have any motive or reason to make a false statement by exaggeration or distortion of the facts in relation to the instant case; and (c) the foregoing statement in E was made in the name of the Defendant from the account in the name of the Defendant.