2. The judgment is based on the favorable sentencing grounds that the fact that the defendant is against the defendant, the fact that the defendant suffers from diseases such as urology, urology, and general crypitis, and that the defendant's physical condition is not good, the fact that double-insurance is not freely free from the responsibility that caused and encourages the crime, and that the crime is long, the number of crimes is high, and the fact that the insurance fraud benefiting from the abuse of the insurance contract imposes economic burdens on many good insurance policyholders, and that there is a great social harm, such as harming the foundation of the insurance system, etc.

In full view of the above sentencing factors, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, motive and background of the crime, the means and consequence of the crime, and all other matters pertaining to the sentencing indicated in the records and arguments of this case, the judgment of the court below is deemed appropriate, and thus, 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 without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.