The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The insured was actually affected by an accident and was diagnosed by normal hospitalized treatment, and thus, the claim for insurance benefits and the receipt thereof do not constitute fraud. 2) The Defendant merely introduced K, N,O, Q to D, and received a diagnosis of a residual disability through I or J, and the Defendant did not know of J or I at the time of the claim for insurance benefits. As such, it cannot be deemed that there was a combination between the Defendant and D, I, and J with the intent to receive insurance benefits by having the insured be hospitalized by false hospitalization and received a false diagnosis of disability.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. In the event of the exercise of rights by means of deception of relevant legal principles, the act belonging to the exercise of rights and the act of deception belonging to the said means are comprehensively observed, and if such deception cannot be acceptable as a means of exercise of rights under social norms, the act belonging to the exercise of rights constitutes fraud.

In addition, there are reasons to receive insurance proceeds.

Even if this is done, if excessive insurance money is paid through long-term hospitalization, etc. with intent to acquire a large amount of insurance money than the actual insurance money, a crime of fraud is established against the whole insurance money received.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Do4665 Decided May 28, 2009, etc.). B.

In full view of the following facts and circumstances that can be recognized by the court below and the court below based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below as to the defendant's sole criminal conduct, the defendant was hospitalized for a long time, even if the defendant does not need long-term hospital treatment, and accordingly, was examined as a result of the disability examination.