The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the court below's imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. A favorable circumstance, such as the fact that the defendant shows an attitude to reflect his/her wrongness, exists.

However, the crime is very poor in light of the details and methods of the crime that the defendant intentionally faced with the body of the vehicle and caused the traffic accident, demanding the vehicle driver to agree or obtained insurance money from the insurance company.

In particular, it is necessary to strictly punish insurance fraud crimes in the sense that the purpose of the insurance system is to undermine reasonable diversification of risks, and ultimately the damage is transferred to many good policy holders.

The defendant has the same criminal records of being punished as the fact that he/she was hospitalized in excess of the adequate number of hospitalization days and acquired insurance money, and there is also a high possibility of criticism in that he/she began to commit the crime of this case at the time when two months have not elapsed since he/she was released during the period of repeated crime due to this type of crime.

There are no circumstances that make efforts to recover damage, even though the period of crime is long and the total amount of fraud is about 1,3480,000 won.

In full view of such unfavorable circumstances and various circumstances as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive for committing a crime, and circumstances after committing a crime, there is no special circumstance or change of circumstances to be evaluated differently from the sentencing conditions of the lower court after the lower court’s judgment, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s punishment is too inappropriate to the extent that it is deemed that the lower court’s punishment exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the conclusion is groundless.