2. It is recognized that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects his mistake, the Defendant appears to have started to commit the instant crime due to his living conditions, and the Defendant had no criminal record other than twice prior to the fine of approximately 30 years.

However, the crime of this case is a false assertion that the defendant got a bicycle in excess of the majority of the victim insurance companies, and is a method of claiming insurance proceeds more than 10 years by taking account of the occurrence of false insurance accidents over 10 years, and the nature of the crime is very poor, in light of the method of the crime, the period of claiming insurance proceeds, the amount of damage amount, etc., the liability for the crime is very heavy, and insurance fraud requires strict punishment as it is likely to inflict damage on many policyholders and impair the social functions of the insurance company. The damage has not been recovered, and the defendant has not been used by the victims, and it has not been taken into account the balance between the punishment of the same and similar cases, the defendant's age, career, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, the means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the defendant's punishment against the defendant is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

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