2. Determination is recognized that the defendant recognized each of the crimes of this case and reflects the fact that the defendant's vehicles are covered by comprehensive insurance, and that the damage of the victim C is likely to be recovered, and that the defendant has no record of being punished for traffic-related crimes.

However, even though the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of repeated crime, the victim C did not agree with the above victim even though the victim C suffered an injury, such as the closure of the chain that requires approximately 14 weeks medical treatment due to the traffic accident of this case, the defendant could not agree with the above victim, the defendant acquired the total amount of insurance money from five victim companies due to the crime of insurance fraud of this case, by fraud of 9,312,564 won, damage to the bona fide insurer in the case of insurance fraud as well as damage to the bona fide insurer in the case of insurance fraud, as well as damage to the general insolvency of the insurance finance and the trust of the insurance finance, and the liability is grave, the damage recovery to the victim of the insurance fraud did not occur, and the defendant has been punished three times including the punishment for fraud.

In addition, in full view of the various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, and there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that make it possible to change the sentencing of the lower court after the judgment of the lower court, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

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.