The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (two years and six months) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the Defendant’s argument on the judgment of ex officio, the lower court ex officio examined the Defendant’s argument on the sentencing of the sentencing. The lower court, in collusion with the co-defendant B of the lower judgment, deemed that the Defendant’s act of taking care benefit costs of KRW 1,723,651,20 in total by the victim of the National Health Insurance Corporation constitutes a single comprehensive crime, and applied Article 3 subparag. 1 subparag. 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, Article 347(1), and Article 30 of the Criminal Act.

However, if the criminal intent is a single crime and the method of crime is the same in case of fraud through deception several times against the same victim, only a single crime of fraud shall be established. However, if the singleity and continuity of the criminal intent are not recognized or the method of crime is not the same, each crime constitutes substantive concurrent crimes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 97Do508, Jun. 27, 1997; 2004Do1751, Jun. 25, 2004); as long as the defendant separately opened and operated medical care costs, it is difficult to recognize the unity of the criminal intent even if the victim is the same, it is difficult to recognize the identity of the criminal intent even if the victim is the same, each of the above medical institutions together with the above crimes are in a substantive concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

It is reasonable to view it.

Ultimately, the lower court, which deemed the entire crime as a single comprehensive crime, erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the number of crimes, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. Therefore, the lower judgment cannot be maintained.

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment of the court below is reversed, and it is decided as follows through a change of opinion.

【Defendant】