The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding and misunderstanding of legal principles do not conflict with damaged vehicles.

Nevertheless, the court below found all of the charges of this case guilty on the basis of the testimony of G and H without credibility. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts or misunderstanding legal principles.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (fine 3,000,000) is too unlimited and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts

B. 1) The lower court appears to have determined the sentence by taking account of various sentencing reasons, including the fact that the Defendant denies the instant crime, the failure to recover damage, the purchase of a comprehensive insurance policy, and the absence of specific criminal records. 2) No particular change exists in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court on the grounds that new sentencing data have not been submitted in the trial, and considering the various sentencing factors revealed in the oral proceedings, the lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable, even if comprehensively considering the various sentencing factors revealed in the oral proceedings.