beta
Text
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
Reasons
1. On December 14, 2019, the Defendant: (a) driven a B “TAC” car on December 14, 2019; and (b) continued along the front road of Seongdong-gu Seoul, Seongdong-gu, Seoul; (c) intentionally got off the D-wing and 31 ton cargo vehicles parked in the signal signal atmosphere; and (d) owing to its shock, the Defendant got off the E-high-speed vehicle where the said cargo vehicle stops in the signal atmosphere from the front bank to the signal atmosphere.
(A) On December 14, 2019, the Defendant received an accident from the victim FF Co., Ltd. to the effect that the said accident was caused by negligence. On December 14, 2019, the Defendant had the victim FF Co., Ltd. pay the Defendant insurance proceeds of KRW 1,210,000 in the name of medical expenses, etc. from December 17, 2019 to February 5, 2020, for the period from December 17, 2019 to February 5, 201, the Defendant paid the Defendant insurance proceeds of KRW 9,933,750 in the name of medical expenses, etc.
In addition, around December 23, 2019, the Defendant received an accident from the victim G Co., Ltd. to the effect that the said accident was caused by negligence, and the Defendant was paid KRW 500,000 as consolation money on December 24, 2019 from the victim G Co., Ltd. for the purpose of paying the said accident by negligence.
Accordingly, the defendant acquired insurance money against insurers by deceiving the occurrence of insurance accidents and causes thereof.
2. The Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion that the instant accident occurred while driving a stroke, and did not intentionally cause an accident. Thus, the Defendant did not deceiving the insurer of the cause of the occurrence of the insurance accident.
3. Determination
A. The establishment of facts constituting an offense in a criminal trial ought to be based on strict evidence of probative value, which leads a judge to such a degree that there is no room for reasonable doubt. Therefore, if the prosecutor’s proof does not sufficiently reach the extent that such conviction would be ensured, the Defendant’s assertion or defense is inconsistent.