logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 진주지원 2019.07.23 2018고정379
보험사기방지특별법위반
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is under leave of absence due to health aggravation while a professor of C University, and is the nominal owner of DST5 car, and Defendant B is a non-permanent owner.

Defendant

B around 17:08 on June 22, 2018, at the Jinju-si, there was a heavy traffic accident that reduces the FMW car volume while driving the said vehicle at the E Underground Shoju-si.

The above vehicle is a "one limited special agreement effective from May 13, 2018 to May 13, 2019" and is operated by another person.

In the event of traffic accident, it was not possible to receive compensation for damages caused by others' property and self-motor vehicle.

The Defendants conspired to acquire insurance money by changing the driver as if they caused a traffic accident while Defendant A, the nominal owner who is one who is entitled to benefit from insurance with the knowledge of such terms and conditions of automobile insurance, is driving the motor vehicle insurance system.

Defendant

On June 22, 2018, A received the insurance money for the damage of property and the damage of one's own vehicle from the above damaged insurance company on the ground that he/she caused a traffic accident in the course of operation at the above accident site on June 22, 2018.

However, the fact that Defendant A did not cause a traffic accident during the operation of Defendant B, but caused a traffic accident during the operation of Defendant B, which is confirmed as a black box in the course of dealing with the accident, and thus the driver was changed to accept the accident, and it was refused to deal with the insurance.

As a result, the Defendants conspired with the above insurance company to pay the insurance money for property damage and own vehicle damage, and received the accident, but there was a change in the driver's time limit, so the Defendants failed to commit the accident.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Application of each police protocol to H and I;

1. Articles 10 and 8 of the Special Act on the Prevention of Insurance Fraud and Article 30 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts

arrow