2016Do18063 A. Fraud

(b) Fraud prevention;

A

Defendant

Law Firm DL

Attorney DI

Chuncheon District Court Decision 2015No251 Decided October 27, 2016

April 13, 2017

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Chuncheon District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In fraud, fraud shall be acquired by deception on several occasions with respect to the same victim.

, if the criminal intent is single and the method of crime is identical, only a single comprehensive crime of fraud shall be established.

C. Supreme Court Decision 2002Do2029 Decided July 12, 2002; Supreme Court Decision 2005Do8645 Decided February 23, 2006

As to the part of the crime in the relation of a single comprehensive crime, the summary order shall be determined.

If it was issued, the judgment of acquittal shall be based on the time of issuance of the summary order with respect to the previous crime.

A. A subsequent crime must be punished only for a single crime (Supreme Court Decision 194. 194).

8.9. See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Do1318, Sept. 1, 201

According to the records, among the facts charged in this case, the fraud described in Paragraph (1) at the time of original adjudication is committed by the defendant C.

The facts that C received hospitalized treatment in collusion with the Department, from August 3, 2009 to August 21, 2012, 2012

As the victim received hospitalized treatment, the National Health Insurance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "Corporation") shall be referred to as the "Corporation").

11 times as shown in the list of crimes in attached Form 1 of the first instance trial by deceiving the Corporation of the victim;

A total sum of 7,817,820 won was obtained as medical care benefit expenses and acquired by fraud, and February 2012.

29. Offenders of summary order No. 2012 high-class 15 issued and finalized at the time of the issuance.

Criminal facts committed against the victim by fraud in the office are committed by the defendant from April 8, 2009 to June 2010.

12. Damage caused by claiming for false expenses for hospitalized treatment, while DK, etc. was hospitalized in a clinic to E;

It can be known that it is "the person who acquired 7,763,720 won in total from the Corporation."

Examining the above facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the fraud described in Paragraph (1) at the time of original adjudication

A crime committed before February 29, 2012 among the facts charged in the indictment (No. 1 of the list of crimes in attached Form 1 of the court of first instance)

The defendant's fraud against the Corporation among the crimes of summary order which became final and conclusive as above.

The criminal facts of crimes committed by all are that all the patients were hospitalized in Ewon operated by the defendant.

The victim is the same as the victim in the case of deceiving the victim public corporation and acquiring the nominal money for medical care expenses;

The place and method of crime are also identical, and the period of crime is overlapping, and the defendant's fraud is different.

Unless there are circumstances to deem that the criminal intent is severed, it is basically a single comprehensive crime.

of the facts charged in the fraud described in paragraph (1), which was conducted before February 29, 2012, at the time of original adjudication.

The part of the crime was prosecuted as a conspiracy with C, and among the facts constituting the final summary order

The part of fraud against the victim was prosecuted and punished solely by the defendant;

Even if it is, it cannot be viewed differently.

Therefore, a crime committed before February 29, 2012 among the facts charged for fraud as stated in paragraph (1) at the time of the original adjudication.

Judgment of acquittal on the ground that the above part has res judicata effect on the final summary order

Although the court below should have determined otherwise, it did not constitute a single comprehensive crime, the court below, at the time of original adjudication, deemed the fraud of paragraph (1)

The guilty of all the facts charged is recognized. In so doing, the original court shall hold a necessary hearing.

There is an error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to the blanket crime, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

The ground of appeal pointing this out is with merit.

As such, at the time of the original adjudication, it was conducted before February 29, 2012 among the facts charged for the fraud described in paragraph (1).

The judgment of conviction cannot be maintained as it is, and the judgment below is guilty.

The remaining criminal facts recognized shall be reversed and the comprehensive crime or the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act

The judgment of the court below (including the part not guilty in the grounds) should be pronounced in relation to concurrent crimes.

must be entirely reversed.

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the remaining grounds of appeal, the judgment below is reversed and the case is reversed.

The case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided by the assent of all participating Justices.

It is so decided as per Disposition.

Justices Kim Yong-deok

Justices Kim Jae-han

Justices Kim In-young

Justices Lee Dong-won