2011 Highest 8492 Fraudulent

1. ○○;

Housing Changwon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Odong-gu

2. Heba 00

Residence: Busan Northern-gu 00 Dong

3. Han ○○.

Residential Gangseo-gu Busan 00 Dong

The fixed-term custody shall be prosecuted and the fixed-term court shall be tried.

Law Firm Enex, Attorney Choi Gi-hun, Law Firm Lnbnb

For the first instance (for the defendant ○○)

Law Firm Jeong, Attorney Go Jong-ju (for the defendant Go-O),

Attorney Lee Im-soo (for the defendant ○○○)

February 7, 2012

Defendant ○○ is punished by imprisonment for a year and six months, by a fine of KRW 10 million, and by a fine of KRW 15 million, and by a fine of KRW 15 million.

In the event that the above fine is not paid by Defendant Do○○ or Han-do○ does not pay the above fine, each of the above Defendants shall be confined to the Labor House for the period calculated by converting 50,000 won into

Criminal facts

On May 13, 2011, Defendant ○○ was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and a fine of two million won in violation of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Public Health Crimes at the Busan District Court, and the decision became final and conclusive on July 28, 201.

Defendant ○○ is an actual operator of a member of the Union of 0000 O-dong 0000 O-dong in Seocho-gu, Changwon-si. Defendant ○○○ and Defendant Hu○○○ is a doctor working at the above member, who is a doctor employed at the above member and has purchased a personal accident insurance from Defendant ○○○, and is not actually in need of medical treatment, or who is sufficient to receive hospital treatment for patients due to hospital treatment.

In fact, as the patient did not have been hospitalized in the hospital, the ○○○○ and the Defendant Hu○○ issued a medical instruction, etc. as if the patient had been properly treated at the hospital. As the nurse of the above hospital was treated in accordance with the above instructions, the x00 and Kim○ conspired to prepare medical records, etc. as if the patient was treated in accordance with the above instructions, and to claim the medical expenses of the victim and to obtain them by fraud.

Therefore, around January 15, 2009, the defendant et al. was diagnosed by Kim ○○○ as a salt base by the above members of the ○○○ Union, but actually did not hospitalization in the above members, provided physical treatment, such as physical treatment. On February 3 of the same year, the above members prepared documents as if they were discharged by the above Kim ○○○, and issued a certificate of entrance and discharge to the above Kim ○○, and accordingly, received 681,520 won by claiming medical expenses, etc. from the above ○○ Union.

In addition, ○○○○ and ○○○, in collusion with the above ○○ and the above ○○, by deceiving the Corporation from January 15, 2009 to March 15, 2010, the victim was paid KRW 23,310,09,090 in total over 55 times in collusion with the above 17,772,80 won per annum of the crime sight table, Defendant Lee ○, and Defendant Hu○○, in collusion with the above 17, 2010 to August 12, 2010, by deceiving the Corporation from the victim to the above 56 to 88,00 won per annum of the crime sight table.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of interrogation of the Defendants, Kim ○, and Lee ○○

1. Each police statement on tide 00, defense room, PO, stuff, PO, KimO, KimO, PO, and KimO;

1. Details of payment of insurance proceeds, submission of materials, and feeds for payment of insurance proceeds;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Criminal records and investigation reports (report attached to a written judgment);

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Articles 347(1) and 30 of the Criminal Code (the defendant 00 is punished by imprisonment, the defendant 80, and the defendant 100 shall be punished by fine, respectively) of the Criminal Code

1. Handling concurrent crimes (DefendantO);

The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Detention in a workhouse (the defendant Dol-○, the Handol-○);

The reason for sentencing in Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Code

1. Although the Defendant had been sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a year due to the crime of forging official documents at the Changwon District Court on January 16, 2008, the Defendant had committed the instant crime during the suspended sentence period, the Defendant may not be severely punished due to the extremely poor nature of the crime in light of the frequency of the crime and the considerable damage: Provided, That the first head of the judgment has the criminal record of the crime, which was punished together, is against the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family environment, etc., and the Defendant’s period of punishment shall be determined by taking account of the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family environment, etc., as well as the confession of the crime

2. Defendant 100, 100O

The nature of the crime of this case is very poor in the fact that the Defendants, as a doctor, committed the crime of this case in collaboration with the Defendant Lee ○○, etc. without actively opposing the Defendant Lee ○○’s instruction, etc.: Provided, That the Defendants, as a doctor of salary class, actively participated in and take into account the circumstances of the crime; there is no direct profit from the crime; there is no direct profit from the crime; the period of participation in the crime does not expire; the confession of the crime; and there is no record of punishment other than once a fine so far; and each of the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, family environment, and circumstances before and after the crime are considered.

Judges Lee Jong-tae