The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Comprehensively considering the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, despite the fact that the defendant sustained from from around January 11, 200 when entering into each insurance contract of this case with the injured company through the method of notifying the injured company by false information about the existing medical history, the court below acquitted the injured company of the facts charged of this case, in spite of the fact that the defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact that the injured company received 130,9260,000 won in total as stated in the facts charged, as stated in the facts charged, and obtained 130,000 won in total as stated in the facts charged, the court below acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case.

2. Determination

A. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged in the instant case on the following grounds: (a) considering the fact that the part on the past medical records, such as medical records and nursing information survey site prepared in the Defendant’s treatment process, entered that the Defendant suffered from urology for a long time, but each time does not coincide with each other; (b) the content indicated in the part of the nursing information survey site corresponds to the Defendant’s first diagnosis of urology around May 2000; and (c) there is a possibility that there was a clerical error, etc. in the course of the Defendant’s wrongful response or preparation of the Defendant’s statement after having received the Defendant’s statement from the hospital at the time; and (d) the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor alone, even if the Defendant suffered urology from urology before January 11, 200, which is the insurance contract date of the instant case, was insufficient to deem that the Defendant obtained the amount equivalent to the insurance proceeds of the instant case by concluding an insurance contract without notifying the victim

B. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant is prior to the conclusion of the instant insurance contract.