The judgment below

The part against the Defendants is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment for two years, Defendant B and C, respectively.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles (based on the judgment of the court below) 1) Defendants not guilty of fraud provided services that meet the criteria for the L Incheon Maintenance Litigation stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court

Therefore, even if the defendants were to leave part of the business, the public official's expenditure was set properly, and there is a duty to notify whether the contract for automobile maintenance is an important factor in determining the price, not an important factor in determining the price.

shall not be deemed to exist.

The victim insurance company was aware that the Defendants knew of the fact that some of the Defendants were in charge of the business, and thus there was a disposition by deception.

shall not be deemed to exist.

The Defendants had the intent to commit the crime of defraudation

It is also difficult to see it.

The list of crimes in the attached Form No. 1 of the holding of the court below includes a considerable portion of the details directly improved by L Incheon Maintenance Office. 2) Even if the victim insurance companies are accused, the victim insurance companies have paid at least the amount equivalent to the general public expenses, not the L Incheon Maintenance Office, so the victim insurance companies have paid the defendants the amount of money equivalent to the general public expenses.

However, there is a lack of proof of inspection on the amount of fraud.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (two years of imprisonment for Defendant A, Defendant B, and C: Imprisonment for each of the two years (two years of suspended sentence) and 120 hours community service) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. 1) In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the judgment of the court below is just.

2) The Defendants and their defense counsel asserted to the effect that the details directly improved by L Incheon Maintenance Office on the list of offenses listed in the judgment below are also included in substantial parts.

However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, employees of L Incheon Maintenance Lawsuit are under the maintenance work.