2. The judgment defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case.

The crime of this case seems to have no profit to be directly acquired by the defendant, and the insurance contract parties who have acquired the real profit agreed to pay damages to the damaged insurance company in full and smoothly.

The principle of equity shall be taken into consideration when a judgment in the original judgment becomes final and conclusive at the same time as a judgment.

There is no particular criminal history except for fraud which has become final and conclusive judgment.

① However, the crime of this case is not likely to be committed in light of the method of crime, etc., by deceiving a damaged insurance company by forging a written confirmation of release on entering and leaving the insurance company to pay insurance proceeds to the policyholders.

(2) The accused has committed repeatedly by using the same method.

③ Such an insurance fraud is an offense that leads to a serious social harm, such as the transfer of damage to a good insurance policyholder and the occurrence of moral hazard.

In addition, the lower court’s sentencing judgment exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion, in full view of the following: (a) the Defendant’s age character and character environment; (b) the motive and means of commission of the crime; and (c) the circumstances after the crime.

There is no circumstance that the assessment or maintenance thereof is deemed unfair (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Therefore, the lower court’s sentencing is appropriate, and the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.