Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part concerning Defendant A, C, D, G, and I and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

Defendant

A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (1) Of the judgment of the first instance court on the erroneous determination of facts, there was no conspiracy or participation in each of the above crimes in relation to the violation of the Medical Service Act related to the establishment of the KIB (A) and each fraud (A) in the judgment of the first instance court on the erroneous determination of facts (A). (2) Of the judgment of the first instance, there was a violation of the Medical Service Act related to the establishment of the medical life cooperative behavior (C, 479 as indicated in the judgment of the first instance court), which is a non-profit corporation, under the provisions of the Consumer Cooperatives Act (hereinafter referred to as the “Consumer Cooperatives Act”), and the RIB established and operated each of the medical institutions (C, 479 as stated in the judgment of the first instance court).

This is an act permitted by the Biological Cooperation Act, and the Biological Cooperation Act takes precedence over the Medical Service Act.

Therefore, even if there is a defect in the procedure for establishing the medical life consultation, or even if the substance of a medical institution is an individual medical institution, it should be regulated pursuant to the relevant laws such as the Biological Cooperation Act, and shall not be punished as a violation of the Medical Service Act, and the punishment as a violation of the Medical Service Act

3) Of the judgment of the court of first instance on the grounds that the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable. (B) Of the judgment of the court of first instance on the mistake of facts, Defendant B (the judgment of the court of first instance against the judgment of the court of first instance), there was no conspiracy and participation in the above crime in relation to the violation of the Medical Service Act relating to the establishment of the R&S S S S S et al. and the establishment of the R&S U et al. (Article 1-C and paragraph (d) of the judgment of the court of first instance (Article 2013

2) As to the allegations in the above-mentioned A-2 of the legal principles.

3) The sentence of imprisonment (three years of imprisonment) imposed by the lower court against the Defendant is too unreasonable. C. Defendant C1’s misapprehension of the legal doctrine (the lower court’s judgment on the first instance judgment) is identical to the allegations in the above A-2). 2) Each of the lower court’s judgment (the first and second lower judgment on the first and second lower judgment) is unreasonable.