beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals filed by B and prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant B (De facto mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles and unreasonable sentencing) 1) On August 10, 2009, Defendant R Co., Ltd. related to traffic accidents (hereinafter “R”)
(2) In the case of receiving insurance money from the Defendant, the above Defendant did not conspired with the Defendant A and the Co-Defendant MNO of the lower court. (2) The sentence (hereinafter referred to as a fine of KRW 4 million) sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.
B. According to the evidence of the prosecutor’s submission by the prosecutor (in fact-finding or misapprehension of the legal principle and unreasonable sentencing) 1, it is recognized that Defendant A CD related to the traffic accident as of June 1, 2013 conspired to receive insurance money from K stock company. 2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on Defendant A (in 1 year of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution, 120 hours of community service order) is too uneasible and unfair.
2. Determination as to Defendant B’s assertion
A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, there is a combination of two or more co-offenders who jointly process a crime, not a statutory punishment, but a combination of intent to realize a crime through the joint processing of a crime. Although there is no process of the whole conspiracy, if there is a combination of intent to realize a crime in a successive or secret manner among several persons, the conspiracy is established. In addition, if the defendant denies the conspiracy, which is a subjective element of a crime, by means of proving indirect facts or circumstantial facts that have considerable relevance to the nature of the crime, the above defendant asserted to the effect that this part of the judgment of the court below is the same, and in light of this, the court below stated the following facts and circumstances in the part of the "decision on the argument of the defendant B and his defense counsel" as stated in the judgment of the court below. In light of this, the above defendant related to traffic accident as of August 10, 2009.