The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (three years of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds of appeal is unreasonable as it is excessively unreasonable compared to the extent of the Defendant’s responsibility.

2. The lower court determined that the crime of violation of the Medical Service Act is likely to ultimately infringe the health and safety of the people, and that the amount of damage caused by the fraud is considerably large, and thus, considering the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, the medical practice, such as the diagnosis and prescription of patients, etc., by the medical personnel, appears to have been lawfully performed by the medical personnel, and the profits acquired by the Defendant do not reach the amount of fraud, and sentenced a minor punishment more than the lower limit of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines

In addition to the above circumstances unfavorable to the defendant, the court below set up a majority of medical institutions to repeat the crime of violation of the Medical Service Act by the defendant, and to have employees in charge of business, such as V, X, Y, and Z, and the defendant voluntarily sent traffic accident patients to the Korean hospital by the prosecutor's office "X, V, as X-V, as an external cooperation team, is going to the mountain conference, native folks society, and other hospitals.

The testimony of the witness AA does not believe that he or she did not employ a business employee or attract the patient in light of the fact that he or she made a false statement (Evidence No. 4,103, evidence records).

Considering the fact that the crime of violation of the Medical Service Act is not good, that there is no agreement with the victims of the fraud, and that the defendant has been punished twice as the insurance fraud in light of the medical institution operation behavior, such as actively attracting inpatientss, the judgment of the court below is proper within the reasonable scope of its discretion, even if it is additionally considered that the defendant acknowledges all the crimes, misjudgments, and that the health of the defendant's family is not very good.