Defendant

A. Imprisonment.

A. As to Defendant A (Definite, misunderstanding of legal principles, and unreasonable sentencing) 1, misunderstanding of facts (hereinafter “2012 Highest 3474,” and “2013 Highest 974”) 1, the Defendant, at the time of the instant case, issued a notice to the person in charge of the instant case, that the vehicle was built on the alleyway near the Daejeon GL hotel located in the Daejeon Pungdong-gu X and the Defendant was returned to the person in charge of the instant case due to the problem of returning the vehicle with D and the vehicle in charge of the instant case. The said vehicle was driven by K, who is the Defendant’s seat, without permission, and it was merely driven by the Defendant without permission, and it was difficult for the Defendant to track the location tracking system by removing the location tracking device as stated in the facts charged and refused to return it. Thus, the judgment of the court below which convicted him of this part of the facts charged was erroneous

B) As to the part of the crime committed by attempted fraud in the "2013 Highest 974", the Defendant claimed 3,290,000 won at sirens’ expense. Although the Defendant did not demand 650,000 won for hospital treatment expenses and 17,239,240 won for vehicle repair expenses to J, the lower court convicted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the judgment of the lower court (as to 2014 Highest 300) (as to 2014 Highest 30, 2020), the Defendant appeared in the police in relation to each of the crimes of "2014 Highest 30, 2020, the number of self-denunciation under Article 52(1) of the Criminal Act should be mitigated, the lower court, which did not reduce self-denunciation

3) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (the first instance court: the second instance court’s imprisonment of 2 years, and the second instance court’s imprisonment of 1 year) is too unreasonable.B. Defendant Q (the second instance court’s imprisonment of 2 years) that the lower court rendered on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance on the part against Defendant A, prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by Defendant A, shall be examined ex officio.