All the Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for ten months.

However, as to the Defendants for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B On November 23, 2016, in the support of the Suwon Friwon for the violation of the Road Traffic Act, imprisonment with prison labor for six months was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years, and the above judgment was finalized on December 1, 2016.

1. On May 27, 2016, Defendant C was involved in the joint crime of the Defendants on the roads of the Seongbuk-dong Home Stacker in Ansan-si, Masan-si, Annsan-si, and without a driver’s license, while driving a motor vehicle under the condition of a motor vehicle, Defendant C was involved in the accident in conflict with Defendant A’s FWz SPs car driven by the right-hand side without properly examining the right-hand side from the right-hand side, and Defendant C was dispatched to the accident scene by Defendant B, who is an employee of the KB non-life insurance company, who is affiliated with the aforesaid MWz car, to take charge of the accident.

Defendant

C At the time of the accident of a high-priced vehicle, Defendant A and Defendant B asked Defendant C to change the driver at the time of the accident of the vehicle in question to G, the wife of Defendant C at the time of the accident of the vehicle in question, and Defendant A and its person in charge of the accident handling the vehicle without a license, who had not been covered by self-insurance, accepted such request.

After the same day, Defendant B shall be allowed to change the driver by telephone from Defendant A, and whether the driver will not receive any benefit.

As a result of mediating between Defendant A and Defendant C, the Defendants, at the time of the accident, have changed the driver of the Haban to a G which was purchased as an insured under a fixed special agreement jointly with Defendant C with the victim Madern Non-Life Insurance Co., Ltd., and as a result, the said G falsely assumes the content of the accident as if it was a traffic accident caused by negligence in the course of Defendant A’s kidsing the kids onto the next lane, and as if it was a traffic accident caused by one’s unilateral negligence, the said G falsely assumes the repair cost of the said two vehicles from the victim.