사기
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
Defendant
B.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., e., imprisonment with prison labor imposed on Defendant A, and fines of KRW 5 million imposed on Defendant B are too unreasonable.
2. Determination on the grounds for appeal
A. Defendant A’s reasoning of appeal against Defendant A is not necessary to be hospitalized even if there is no need to receive a large amount of insurance proceeds, and there is a lack of the nature of the crime, such as taking over insurance proceeds exceeding KRW 33 million by hospitalizing more than 16-27 days every five times. The insurance fraud of this case, such as this case, is serious because it causes the sacrifice of a large number of policyholders, thereby impairing the foundation of the insurance system, and thus, there is a need to strictly punish Defendant A, etc. disadvantageous to Defendant A.
However, Defendant A has no record of punishment other than three times before and after a fine of different kind in this case, and is a disabled person of Grade III with a delay disability. In particular, Defendant A made a confession of the entire crime for the victims, and made a deposit of approximately three million won in total for the victims. Examining the conditions of sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, including Defendant A’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the punishment imposed by the court below against Defendant A is too unreasonable.
B. There are extenuating circumstances, such as that Defendant B’s judgment on the grounds of appeal by Defendant B was an initial criminal without any previous criminal record, and that both confessions were made during the trial, and the mistake is divided.
However, despite the absence of the record of hospitalized treatment, Defendant B had no record of being hospitalized, there was a defect in the quality of the crime, such as taking over the insurance proceeds exceeding 7.2 million won in total by 22-26 days through two times to receive the hospitalized treatment insurance proceeds; Defendant B did not agree with the victims or have not repaid the damage; Defendant B was highly in need of severe punishment in light of the social harm of insurance fraud; and Defendant B’s age.