Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who has served as a designer of B insurance and is a person who is a person with a prison life and a ward with C.

Defendant

In addition, C has conspired to claim insurance money to the insurance company in disguise of a false traffic accident and receive insurance money from the insurance company.

Defendant

및 C은 2011. 6. 29. 15:30 경 충북 청원군 D에 위치한 'E' 앞 사거리에서 피고인이 운전하는 F 카 렌스 차량의 우측 빽 밀러 부분으로 C의 좌측 팔 부위를 부딪힌 사실이 없었다.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, in collusion with C, suffered from the injury of arms elbow elbows in collusion with C which requires approximately one week medical treatment due to the above traffic accident.

After receiving treatment at a hospital, C filed a claim for insurance money with the victim B company, and C received a total of KRW 526,950,000 including KRW 36,950 and KRW 4.950,000 under the pretext of agreement, and the Defendant obtained a delivery of KRW 5.2 million as security money for defense costs.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement made by C by the witness in the second public trial protocol;

1. Entry of the witness G in part of the third public trial record;

1. A protocol concerning suspect interrogation of C by the prosecution;

1. A detailed statement of payment of insurance proceeds and a claim for insurance proceeds;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on recording;

1. Article 347 (1) and Article 30 of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Articles 347 (Selection of Penalty) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The instant traffic accident is actually caused by the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion, and there is no fact that he acquired insurance money from the insurance company in collusion with C by pretending a false traffic accident.

2. According to the following facts and circumstances acknowledged as a result of the examination of evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, the defendant was found to have obtained insurance money from the insurance company in collusion with C, so the above assertion by the defendant and the defense counsel is without merit.

A. C. This case