2. Determination as follows: (a) the amount obtained by defraudation from the instant crime is not so significant; (b) the equity with the case of being judged at the same time with the case of a violation of Road Traffic Act (Pronouncement: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months); and (c) the Defendant reflects the fact that it is against the Defendant’s recognition of the instant crime, etc.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is committed in collusion with the defendant A in order to report the insurance amount of about seven million won to the insured jointly with the defendant who is a joint purchaser of the insurance policy and acquired insurance money equivalent to about seven million won from the insurance company with the insurance company as the driver of the accident. The damage is ultimately attributable to the burden of a large number of general insurance subscribers. In light of the method and scale of the crime, it is not good that the crime is committed and the crime is committed, the damage is not recovered, and there is a lot of records of punishment for traffic-related crimes, and in particular, the defendant has been punished for traffic-related crimes on December 9, 201, and there are 8 months of imprisonment with prison labor and suspension of execution two years, and the crime of this case has been committed during the suspension of execution, and there is no reasonable and reasonable scope of punishment of the defendant, considering all the circumstances such as the defendant's economic circumstances, age, behavior, environment, changes after the crime, and whether there is any change in the circumstances after the sentence of the court below.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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 groundless. It is so ordered as per Disposition.