All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.

The lower court found the Defendant guilty on the charge of fraud on July 25, 2017, the general automobile fire prevention, and the fraud on October 11, 2018, and found the Defendant guilty of the remainder of the facts charged.

On the other hand, the prosecutor appealed only against the general automobile fire prevention and the fraud on October 11, 2018, and did not appeal against the fraud on July 25, 2017, and the defendant appealed against the guilty portion.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below as to the fraud of July 25, 2017 is separately finalized, and the scope of the judgment of the court is limited to the guilty part of the judgment of the court below and the general automobile fire prevention part, and the acquittal part as to the fraud of October 11, 2018.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The following circumstances can be acknowledged by indirect evidence and circumstantial evidence submitted by the prosecutor (fact-finding). The defendant disposed of a singing room operated by the defendant around July 2018, and around that time, and there was sufficient motive to receive insurance money after then setting fire to the first low-priced car (hereinafter “the instant car”). As a result of the CCTV analysis in the place where the crime was committed before and after the crime was committed, other persons than the defendant can not be identified; although the above CCTV differs from the clothes of the defendant taken in the above CCTV and the clothes of the person who destroyed the instant car, the crime of fire prevention of this case was committed using a detonating gun; the defendant first purchased the instant car prior to the date of the crime of this case; the defendant did not have stolen the instant car parking lot (hereinafter “the instant parking lot”).