1. The part concerning Defendant G among the judgment below is reversed.

Defendant

G shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

except that this shall not apply.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal that the court below sentenced the Defendants to each punishment (Defendant F and H: 6 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution, and 6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. It is recognized that Defendant F and H Defendants did not have the same criminal record, the amount acquired by deception is relatively little, Defendant F agreed to pay KRW 1,721,370 to the victim Samsung T&T Co., Ltd., and Defendant H paid KRW 1,984,260 to the victim M&T non-life insurance company, and Defendant H’s crime of this case is necessary to consider equity with the case where Defendant H received a judgment at the same time as the case of a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. (mariana) on Criminal Records in the judgment of the lower court, which is in the relationship of single concurrent crimes after Article 37.

However, the crime committed by the above Defendants is an insurance fraud that obtains unjust profits by abusing insurance contracts, and there is a large amount of social harm, such as transfer of damage to large number of good insurance subscribers, and skeing the foundation of the insurance system.

In full view of the above circumstances and the above Defendants’ age, sexual conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., and the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court’s sentencing committee, etc., the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

Therefore, Defendant F and H’s assertion are without merit.

B. Defendant G’s instant crime committed by Defendant G is highly harmful to the society as a crime of insurance fraud, and Defendant G was punished three times by a fine for a crime of double-party crime.

However, Defendant G agreed to pay KRW 1,799,940 to the victim Samsung T&T Co., Ltd. in the first instance.

In addition, the above circumstances and the defendant G’s age, sex behavior, environment, family relationship, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, etc. are shown in the argument of this case, such as the following circumstances.