beta
Text
Defendant
A and C Imprisonment for six months, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of two million won, respectively.
Defendant
B The above fine.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
A is a pharmacist who is a former representative of the E pharmacy and operates the above pharmacy.
On February 11, 201, the Seoul Western District Court issued an order to pay KRW 50 million to Defendant A at the rate of 5% per annum from July 16, 2006 to 20% per annum from the following day to the full payment date. On October 23, 2013, the victim F was ordered to obtain an order to seize and collect claims against the National Health Insurance Corporation of the third party for medical expenses of the above E pharmacy from the National Health Insurance Corporation, which shall be paid by the National Health Insurance Corporation, for KRW 58,257,440, the Defendant A paid false debt for the purpose of evading compulsory execution related to the above claims and collection orders.
1. Defendant A and B conspired with Defendant A to commit a joint crime, and the facts are as follows: (a) on January 22, 2014, a notary public located in the 710-dong 710 of the members of the Gyeonggi-si, Gyeonggi-si, who did not have any obligation to Defendant B; (b) prepared a bill of exchange with the issuer “A,” the payee “B,” and the face value “100 million won,” at the office of the law firm branch; and (c) Defendant A bears false liability as if Defendant A had a promissorysory note amounting to KRW 100 million against Defendant B; and (d) around March 28, 2014, Defendant B received a seizure and collection order from the Suwon District Court to the National Health Insurance Corporation of the third person on the ground of the above bill of exchange’s certificate from the Suwon District Court on the ground of the foregoing bill of exchange’s certificate from March 28, 2014, and received KRW 585,862,206.
2. The facts of the Defendant A and C’s joint crimes do not have any burden on the Defendant A’s debt, and the Defendant A and C did not have any transfer of the claim against the Defendant C from the Defendant C, and the Defendant A and the Defendant C were to have acquired the Defendant’s claim against the Defendant C from the Defendant C.