The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., a fine of KRW 20,00,000) of the lower court (e.g., a fine of KRW 20,000) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the judgment of the first instance court on the sole ground that it is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court, and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The following are the circumstances favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant recognized his/her mistake and reflects his/her depth; (b) the Defendant was a primary offender; (c) the Defendant was not actively demanding rebates; and (d) the Defendant was aware of his/her mistake and voluntarily surrenders to the investigation agency to cooperate in the investigation

Meanwhile, in light of the background and method of the crime, etc., the crime is bad, and the practices of rebates which are limited to the medical community are likely to be determined depending on whether the choice of the drug would be provided rebates compared to the treatment suitability of the patient, and the overall State is serious, such as the increase of the patient's burden and the aggravation of the health insurance finance, etc., and thus, the overall harm and injury to the nation is serious. Therefore, a strict punishment is required for the act of receiving rebates illegally, and the amount of rebates received by the defendant is not more than 43,200,000 won in total, and the period of receiving the rebates

Therefore, the court below determined the punishment within a reasonable scope by fully taking into account all the circumstances regarding the sentencing of the defendant, and there is no circumstance that can be newly considered in the trial.

In addition, the lower court comprehensively takes account of the various circumstances, such as the motive and means of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., which are the conditions for sentencing as revealed in the sentencing deliberation process of the lower court.