1. The defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months;

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1...

Punishment of the crime

1. The sole criminal conduct of Defendant A;

A. On December 27, 2009, the Defendant: (a) around 18:00 on December 27, 2009, operated a HD car on the road in front of the upstream-dong located in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul; (b) on the ground that the removal of the HD car spreaded by the K D D D D dump removal vehicle belonging to the agency of Jung-gu, Jung-gu, Jung-gu, Jung-gu, Seoul, caused the J to remove the front portion of the said HD car; and (c) completed the accident with the HD car as if the hump vehicle was damaged by a sudden accident.

However, the defendant found that the above snow removal vehicle spreads the snow removal system, and operated a part of the snow removal vehicle in close vicinity to the snow removal vehicle, thereby causing an accident that enables the snow removal system to contact the Aburged vehicle.

On December 29, 2009, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received 360,000 won under the pretext of non-repair expenses.

B. On May 3, 2011, at around 21:30 on May 3, 201, the Defendant received an accident to the victims Hyundai Commercial Reinsurance Co., Ltd. on the ground that he was flaged by flaging HD car in front of the flagic wave located in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and caused damage to the front and rear parts of the driver’s seat while driving HD car on the roads of the flag, Jung-gu, Seoul, Seoul, and then the Defendant made a false statement as if the flag car was damaged due to a sudden accident.

However, in fact, the Defendant got off the said car and then got back the car until the contact with the surrounding chemical group, which caused an accident to contact the said chemical group.

On May 25, 201, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received KRW 962,00 from the victim as the repair cost for vehicles.

2. Defendants A and C conspired to claim and divide insurance proceeds by intentionally causing a traffic accident using two automobiles.

According to the above public offering, Defendant C is Lysta car.