The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In a case where there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the court below on the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing, and the sentencing of the court below does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). No new sentencing data is submitted in this court, and there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared with the original judgment.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the criminal facts of this case and the size and frequency of the medical care benefit cost, etc. obtained by the Defendant, etc., and the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and pleadings, such as the fact that the crime is not less complicated than the nature of the crime, and the failure to receive a letter from the victim, etc., even if considering the factors of sentencing favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant led to the confession of the crime, and the fact that the Defendant has no criminal history, and most of the money acquired by the Defendant from the National Health Insurance Corporation was used as hospital operating expenses or personnel expenses, etc.

The defendant's assertion that the sentencing of the court below is too unreasonable is not accepted.

2. Conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed for lack of grounds.