beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months.
except that this shall not apply.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because each sentence imposed on the Defendants (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for a year of 1 year and 10 months, Defendant B: fine of 6 million won) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The crime of this case as to Defendant A’s assertion of unfair sentencing is that Defendant A’s employment of those who are not qualified for physical therapy specialists to receive non-benefit items’ water treatment expenses, etc., and the patients who purchased the real insurance receive losses from the insurers, such as water treatment expenses, etc. The medical practice conducted by the unqualified persons is a medical act that is likely to cause harm to human life, body, or general public health, and there is a need to strictly punish them. The Defendant’s crime of this case is for a long period of not less than one year and six months, with substantial economic benefits acquired by the Defendant, with considerable amount of money obtained by the Defendant’s fraud, and about 400 million won, etc. are disadvantageous to Defendant A.
However, in light of various sentencing conditions shown in the argument of this case, such as Defendant A’s age, sexual conduct, environment, the process and consequence of the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment against Defendant A is somewhat unreasonable and unfair, since it is recognized that the Defendant’s punishment against Defendant A is somewhat unreasonable, since it is recognized that the Defendant’s punishment against Defendant A is somewhat unreasonable, since it is the first offender, the Defendant’s entire deposit of the money by the insurance company, which is the victims of fraud, and the damage was restored by taking account of the entire amount of the money obtained for the victims of fraud, and the instant unqualified water treatment, etc.
B. Defendant B’s judgment on Defendant B’s wrongful assertion of sentencing was made in the first instance, and all of the crimes of this case were led to confessions and reflects his mistake, and there was no criminal record of the same kind.