The judgment below

The guilty part against Defendant A and D and the part against Defendant E shall be reversed.

Defendant

A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of Defendant A (one year and six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, and 225 hours of probation and community service) is too unreasonable.

B. As to Defendant D1’s misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles on U, B, and C’s exercise of each false diagnosis report (Article 1 and 2(1) of the facts constituting a crime in the judgment of the court below), Defendant D, based on his medical experience, and the result of the examination of U, and the relevant materials, such as a forged diagnosis report in the name of AO submitted by U, upon receiving the first diagnosis from Defendant D, did not recognize that U is false at the time of preparing a diagnosis report on the damage to the upper left left left, and there was no fact that Defendant D conspired to prepare a false diagnosis report between Defendant A and U, or instructed or conspired to conduct a false diagnosis on U between Defendant E and Defendant E.

Therefore, while the court below acquitted Defendant D of the charge of taking property in breach of trust by Defendant A or U in return for the preparation of a false medical certificate against U, it erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the crime of preparing a false medical certificate and the crime of exercising the same, the court below acquitted Defendant D of the charge of taking property in breach of trust.

(2) Defendant D trusted the result of the nearby examination conducted by Defendant E, who was in a medical relationship with Defendant A, B, and C (hereinafter “R hospital”) as a rehabilitation doctor at the T Hospital. Based on this, Defendant D drafted a medical certificate on the left-hand petal damage to B and C.

Accordingly, Defendant D is subject to B, .