logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.07.21 2015노1511
사기
Text

All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

All applications filed by applicants for compensation shall be dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal that the prosecutor submitted to the court below was admissible on the ground that the document “documents prepared under other circumstances especially reliable” under Article 315 subparag. 3 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which is naturally admissible as evidence, submitted by the prosecutor to the court below (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Da31548, Apr. 1, 200).

In addition, the court below did not complete all necessary hearings by sentencing a judgment on the grounds that the appraisal period of the medical records of the Defendants requested by the prosecutor is long and that the appraisal fee is high.

As such, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts due to the violation of the evidence law and the failure to examine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Summary of the facts charged in this case

A. Defendant A purchased a total of 7 insurance companies from March 8, 2007 to June 8, 2012, including Defendant A’s Life Insurance Co., Ltd.’s Non-Payment of Distribution of Life Insurance Co., Ltd.

The Defendant, as seen above, did not need to receive hospital treatment by using multiple insurances, was hospitalized, or was hospitalized for a longer period than the actual period of time when hospital treatment was required, and was issued with a written confirmation of hospitalization, and did not mislead the insurance company to receive insurance proceeds by using the method of claiming insurance proceeds.

From March 8, 2007 to March 27, 2007, the Defendant was hospitalized at E Hospital located in Namposi-si D for 20 days due to scarcity and high blood pressure, etc. However, the fact is sufficient for 7 days as the Defendant was hospitalized only when he administered symptoms without any scarbing appeal during the hospitalization, and there was no need to undergo the above long-term hospitalized treatment.

On March 30, 2007, the defendant obtained a hospitalization certificate from the above hospital on March 30, 2007.

arrow