beta
Text
The judgment below
Part concerning Defendant A and B shall be reversed.
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., both types of punishment) that the court below sentenced against the Defendants (e.g., one year and two months of imprisonment; two years of suspended execution in August; two years of community service order 160 hours; and Defendant G’s imprisonment) are too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Although each of the instant crimes against Defendant A and B was committed by the Defendants with intentionally causing a traffic accident and the nature of the crime was poor in light of the method of crime and the frequency of the crime, the amount of fraud, and the amount of fraud, etc., the Defendants confessioned to some of the previous crimes that they had been denied at the court of first instance and resisted them in depth, and they constitute an agreement with the victims regarding the crime Nos. 1 and 3 at the court below, the Defendants returned the insurance money received from the victims in relation to the crime No. 1 and 2 at the court below, and agreed with the victims, the Defendants did not have any record of punishment for the same crime, the Defendants must support the awareness that they had been punished for the same crime, equity of punishment with the accomplices, the motive and background leading up to each of the instant crimes, the age, character and conduct of the Defendants, etc. after the crime, and other various kinds of sentencing factors indicated in the records are considered to be unfair.
B. Although there are favorable circumstances for Defendant G, such as the fact that the Defendant’s mistake was divided, and that the Defendant returned the insurance money that the Defendant received from the victim, these circumstances appears to have been considered in the lower court. Meanwhile, the crime of this case is deemed to have been committed in light of the content thereof, the fact that the Defendant was tried due to the crime of the same law, which led to the instant crime while the Defendant was being tried due to the same law, and the insurance fraud, such as this case, leads to the increase of the insurance premium, and ultimately leads to damage to the good insured.