The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Each crime of fraud, 1, 2, and 3 times a year of crime sight table in the judgment A, provided that 2,3.0

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence of the lower court [Defendant A: 1, 2, and 3 each of the frauds (excluding each of the frauds against the victim Hansung Non-Life Insurance Co., Ltd., Ltd., during the period of two and three years per annum)] is too unreasonable. It is so unfair that the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable that the remaining frauds are punished by imprisonment for six months, by imprisonment for one year and six months, by one year, by one year.].

2. Determination

A. The following facts are unfavorable to the Defendant.

The crime of this case is committed by deceiving an insurance company by deceiving the insurance company after intentionally paying a traffic accident, and such an insurance fraud crime becomes worse in the finance of the insurance company, and ultimately causes damage to the bona fide insured. Therefore, the crime of this case is very poor.

The Defendant committed the instant crime against multiple insurance companies for about four years and six months.

Some of the crimes of this case have been committed during the period of repeated crime.

On the other hand, the following conditions are favorable.

The defendant is in profoundly against his wrongness.

In the first instance, the victims were compensated for part of the amount of damage to the Insurance Co., Ltd. in the modern Sea and agreed with the said victims.

The health of defendants is not good.

In addition, when comprehensively considering the circumstances of the crime of this case, the circumstances after the crime of this case, the age of the defendant, sexual conduct, environment, etc., various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of this case, the court below's punishment is somewhat inappropriate, and the defendant's assertion is reasonable.

B. Defendant B’s crime is an insurance fraud, which is bad in the nature of the crime, and the fact that Defendant B committed a crime against multiple insurance companies for about three years and eight months is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the following conditions are favorable.

The defendant reflects his fault in depth.

Most of the victims agreed with or deposited for the victims.

There is no charge exceeding a fine for the defendant.