The appeal filed by the prosecutor and the Defendants shall be dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In full view of the prosecutor’s (i.e., mistake of facts P andO, the statement made by the owner of the vehicle to the investigative agency, and the documents prepared by the insurance company, the judgment of the court below that acquitted part of the facts charged is unreasonable, even if the defendants intentionally damaged the vehicle and acquired the insurance money by false acceptance of the insurance company.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the Defendants (two years of suspended execution in October, and one hundred and twenty hours of community service) is too uneasable and unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The summary of the Prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts (the part not guilty) is that the Defendants conspired with the owner of the vehicle and damaged part of the vehicles that did not have any defects in the entire color, and acquired the insurance proceeds from the insurance company in the name of the repair cost for the entire painting.

The court below found the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged (No. 2, 3, 8, 9, 13, 15 through 18, 20, 23, 24, 25, 28 through 31, 33, 34, 36, 37, 39, 40, 42, 44, 44, 45, 48 through 58, and 61 through 64 in the attached Table 1 of the Criminal Procedure List) on the ground that the interrogation protocol prepared by the judicial police officer and each investigation report by the owner of the vehicle in relation to the defendant and the accomplice are inadmissible, and the other evidence alone is insufficient to recognize the facts charged.

Comprehensively taking account of the circumstances in the reasoning of the court below acknowledged by the evidence, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the prosecutor.

3. Circumstances unfavorable to the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing: The crime of this case is committed by the Defendants by deceiving the insurance money by claiming that they are false repair costs or public services over a long period of time.

e.beliable;