The judgment below

The guilty part shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

1. The lower court rendered a judgment of innocence regarding each of the frauds listed in the annexed Table No. 2 and No. 5, among the facts charged in the instant case, and sentenced the remainder of the facts charged, and appealed only for the guilty portion.

Therefore, since the judgment of the court below became final and conclusive on the part of acquittal for which the prosecutor and the defendant did not appeal, the judgment of the court is limited to the guilty part of the

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. The Defendant intentionally caused a traffic accident in order to obtain insurance money, or did not instruct KBO to commit an intentional accident, and part of the closed vehicle paid is unrelated to the Defendant who is the same passenger, and the Defendant acquired the money.

Although it cannot be seen, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case (except for the portion of the charge without fault) erred by misapprehending the facts and legal doctrine.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of ex officio appeal, the prosecutor tried to examine the facts charged as to the fraud listed in No. 1 of the annexed crime list of the annexed crime list of the indictment at the time of the trial of the party, while maintaining the facts charged as the primary facts charged, the Defendant applied for amendments to the indictment stating that “the Defendant, while driving a AH-free car and driving a facility, did not shock the width of the facility,” in the “criminal charge” No. 1 of the annexed crime list of the annexed crime list of the preliminary facts charged, although the Defendant did not have shocked the facilities, he applied for amendments to the indictment stating that “the Defendant obtained insurance money as if the Defendant’s vehicle and street were damaged by shocking the street

As examined below, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the primary facts charged is erroneous, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and the court below acquitted the defendant of the primary facts charged.