beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The Defendants are not guilty.
Reasons
1. A summary of the grounds of appeal 1) misunderstanding the legal principles and misunderstanding the other party’s duty of safe driving or breach of duty of care is an accident that happens unexpectedly and rapidly. The accident in this case is not an accident that the Defendants conspired to acquire insurance money by fraud.
2) The sentence of the lower court (Defendant A: a fine of KRW 10 million, Defendant B: a fine of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination 1) The Defendants, on August 7, 2015, on the summary of the factory laboratory, were on board a vehicle along with another vehicle and conspired to receive insurance proceeds after intentionally shocking the accident when another vehicle is carried out.
Defendant
B On August 7, 2015, around 12:10, in accordance with the above public offering, while driving a DWS golf car (hereinafter referred to as “gol car”) along the two-lanes on the roads near the YY-dong, Y-gu, YY-gu, Ansan-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and driving a DWS golf car (hereinafter referred to as “gol car”) with Defendant A, Defendant A on the steering line, it was found that the EF car operating prior to the three-lanes intends to enter the two-lanes, and that the EF car operating on the two-lanes (hereinafter referred to as “Coon car”), while driving the said car on the two-lanes, caused intentionally an accident that meets the left side of the CWS and the right side of the golf vehicle.
However, the Defendants had a driver of a passenger car without knowledge of the fact that he paid insurance money to the victim as “the victim caused an accident due to negligence,” and received the accident. The Defendants received KRW 3,580,700 in total under the name of insurance money around August 12, 2015.
2) The lower court, based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated, can be recognized that the Defendants conspired to commit the instant traffic accident and acquired the insurance proceeds by deception against the victim. Therefore, each of the Defendants is a crime of fraud.