beta
Text
1. The judgment below is reversed.
2. The defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment for six months and by imprisonment for four months.
3.Provided, That.
Reasons
1. Although the Defendants conspired to report the receipt of a false insurance accident, the lower court accepted the facts charged in the instant case and found the Defendants guilty. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. According to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendants ex officio, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal, the records show that Defendant A was sentenced on July 9, 2012 to one year and three months of the suspension of execution on the grounds of fraud, etc. at the former Jeju District Court, which became final and conclusive on April 10, 2013, and Defendant B was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the former District Court on November 30, 2012, and that the judgment became final and conclusive on June 3, 2013. As such, each of the crimes against which the judgment became final and conclusive and the instant crimes against the Defendants are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, taking into account equity in cases where the judgment is to be rendered simultaneously in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, and after examining whether to reduce or exempt the sentence. In this respect, the judgment below is no longer maintained.
However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendants' assertion of mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.
B. The Defendants asserted a mistake of facts as to the Defendants’ assertion on the grounds of appeal in this case, and the court below rejected the Defendants’ assertion in detail under the title “the judgment on the Defendants and their attorneys’ assertion” in the grounds of appeal. In line with the records and records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law of mistake of facts as pointed out by the Defendants.
Therefore, the Defendants’ above.