logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.10.07 2015고정2196
사기등
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 2,500,000, and by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

The Defendants respectively.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On March 29, 2015, at around 04:53, Defendant B: (a) driven a string car near the Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, Seoul; (b) caused damage to KRW 6,300,000 to repair a halog car parked adjacent to the road by shocking the D-owned width car which was parked adjacent to the road; and (c) made phone call to Defendant B, who was a party to the comprehensive insurance association with respect to the halog car at around the site of the traffic accident at around 13:00 on the same day, Defendant B told the police officer of the past women-friendly-gu, which was a party to the comprehensive insurance association with respect to the haol-si car; and (d) caused Defendant B to the effect that Defendant A was in charge of driving the halog car on March 30, 2015, the following day by calling the police officer to the police officer at the traffic investigation team of the Suwon-gu, Suwon-gu, Police Station.

2. On March 30, 2015, Defendant A, upon the request of Defendant B, was aware of the fact that Defendant B committed a crime corresponding to a fine or heavier punishment upon the request of Defendant B, on March 30, 2015, Defendant A attended the Transportation Investigation Team Office at Suwon-won Police Station Office and made a false statement to the police officer in charge as if the Defendant A caused a traffic accident, thereby allowing Defendant B to escape.

3. The Defendants were driven by Defendant B at the time of a traffic accident, as described in paragraph (1) around 13:00 on March 29, 2015, but they subscribed to a comprehensive insurance policy for Defendant B only the victim Hyundai Marine Fire Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim”) (hereinafter “the victim company”). In the event of an accident involving Defendant B’s driving, it does not deal with the insurance. As such, the Defendants conspired the victimized company to make the victim of the traffic accident state his/her driver as Defendant A at the time of the traffic accident to pay the automobile repair cost, etc. to the victim of the traffic accident. Defendant A, by telephone around 16:30 on March 29, 2015, was driving at the time of the traffic accident.

arrow