All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

The punishment sentenced by the first instance court (for defendant A, 10 months of imprisonment, additional collection of 10,000 won, and defendant C: 6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Defendant

A narcotics crime is not easy to detect due to its characteristics, and it has a negative impact on society as well as on high risk of recidivism. From around 2015, Defendant A issued a disposition of suspension of indictment one time for the same crime, and repeated crimes of purchase, receipt, and medication in a short period after having been sentenced two times of imprisonment. In particular, even though it is a repeated offense period, Defendant A received and administered phiphones without being aware of it.

In addition, Defendant A committed a crime of fraud and attempted fraud in collusion with Defendant C by altering a medical certificate, a written confirmation of hospitalization, and an external set. In the case of an “insurance fraud” crime, social harm is very high by impairing the foundation of the insurance system and causing damage to many subscribers.

In full view of all other circumstances indicated in the records and arguments of this case, including Defendant A’s age, character and conduct and environment, motive and method of the crime, details and method of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., even when considering all of the following factors: (a) Defendant A recognizes all of the crimes of this case; and (b) Defendant A submits a written confirmation of repayment to Defendant A in the name of the victim F Co., Ltd. of the fraud crime for the purpose of Defendant A at the trial; (c) the sentencing of the first instance court is conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion; and

Therefore, Defendant A’s assertion is without merit.

Defendant

C The crime of this case committed by Defendant C is committed in collusion with Defendant A by forging a medical certificate, a written confirmation of hospitalization, and an external set in collusion with Defendant A, thereby deceiving or attempted insurance proceeds from an insurance company. In the case of the so-called so-called “insurance fraud” crime, social harm is very high by impairing the foundation of the insurance system and causing damage to many subscribers.

Defendant

C. The same kind.