The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The reasoning for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (five million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Article 27(3) of the Medical Service Act prohibits any person from committing the instant crime under the National Health Insurance Act or the Medical Benefits Act, providing money, goods, etc., or providing transportation convenience to many and unspecified persons, in principle, only in exceptional cases, such as “an act of attracting patients with prior approval from the head of the competent market, etc. individually on the ground of the patient’s economic condition, etc.” (Article 27(3) of the Medical Service Act. However, the Defendant, as the president of H, introduced blood fluora to the members and non-member flusium, introduced blood flusium to the patient, and paid part of the money to the patient for the purpose of supporting the Association and supporting the patient. The Defendant committed the instant crime using the remainder as operating expenses of the Association. However, the Defendant was held liable for the instant crime because it constitutes an act of attracting patients through the provision of money and valuables clearly prohibited under the aforementioned Act, and there is no evidence that the Defendant acquired economic benefits, and there is no special reason to reduce the Defendant’s fine by 80 million won.

In addition, given that the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, economic condition, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable as it is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion is groundless.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.