A. Fact-misunderstanding: In light of the fact that the insurer had knowledge of the fact that “in the event of an accident caused by drinking driving, the insurer is partially exempted” under the automobile insurance clause, there was no intention of defraudation.

B. Sentencing: The sentence of the lower judgment (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the fact that in the event of an accident caused by a driving of drinking or a non-licensed driving, the insured should pay some of the amount to the insurance company, but the insurance processing is possible through media reports, etc. for a long time, and that even if the details of the specific terms and conditions are not known, it can be sufficiently anticipated that the insured may suffer disadvantages in the event of an accident caused by driving of drinking, it constitutes a deceptive act, and it is recognized that the insured had not notified of the fact of driving of drinking at the time of the

Therefore, the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. Although there are favorable grounds for sentencing, such as the fact that the amount of fraud by the illegal part of the sentencing is not larger than 2.40,00 won, considering the reasons for unfavorable sentencing, such as the fact that the damage has not yet been recovered, the fact that the previous criminal conviction can be seen as a fine, the defendant's age, family relationship, economic situation, circumstances leading to the crime and motive, and all other matters concerning the sentencing as indicated in the records and arguments of this case, the punishment of the court below is deemed appropriate, and there is no change in circumstances to be considered in the

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 without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.