Around June 25, 2015, the Defendant and C, within the call taxi driven by C, intended to obtain money by accepting the accident as if the accident caused by the intentional traffic accident caused by the use of a motor vehicle, and by receiving the insurance money.

After that, around 18:00 on June 28, 2015, the Defendant: (a) driven a DNA car and parked on the front road of the Sinsi-dong, Sinsi-si; and (b) unloaded from the said K5 car; (c) A followed the Defendant by driving a siren EK5 car and driving it; (d) A, as he promised in advance, caused the accident caused intentionally by the front part of the said K5 car; and (e) received the report of the insurance accident from the insurance officer of the Victim's Credit Guarantee Association, which is subscribed to the said K5 car, as if it was a normal traffic accident.

Around July 1, 2015, the Defendant and C conspired with the victim, and deceiving the victim as such, received 7,50,000,000 won from the post office account under the name of the Defendant from the victim to the corporate bank account under the name of the Defendant, and acquired 8,950,000 won in total from the victim under the name of agreement, repair expenses, and medical expenses, and acquired 8,450,000 won from the victim on two occasions on July 3, 2015.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to request an investigation, a written resolution on the payment of substitutes, and written agreement;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Articles 347(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts are recognized as having led to the confession of the crime of this case, and the amount of damage of this case is not relatively significant. Meanwhile, in light of the content and method of the crime of this case, it is not good that the crime of this case is committed, the defendant did not make any effort to recover damage to the victim’s property, and the defendant is similar to the crime of this case around 2006.