1. The part of the judgment of the court below regarding Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

2. A prosecutor;

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each sentence (Defendant A: 10 months of imprisonment and 2 years of probation, community service work 120 hours, Defendant B: 10 months of imprisonment) declared by the prosecutor by the court below is too unfasible and unfair.

B. The above sentence that the court below decided against Defendant B is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The court below against Defendant A (the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing) determined the above punishment against the Defendant on the grounds as stated in its reasoning. The above insurance fraud crime of this case ultimately leads to damage to the good insurance subscribers, but it could shake the foundation of the insurance system, which is the reasonable diversification of risks, and thus, the prosecutor's assertion that the amount of the insurance money acquired by the Defendant (as approximately KRW 34.5 million) was inevitable, and the amount of the insurance money acquired by the Defendant was not much significant, seems to have sufficiently taken into account when determining the punishment in the court below. The circumstances alleged by the prosecutor as a reason for the unfavorable sentencing in the court below are likely to be sufficiently taken into account. The defendant is against the time of the crime of this case, and some victims (as KB non-life insurance company, "stock company" is omitted from the name of KB non-life insurance

Considering the fact that not only deposited approximately KRW 14 million for damage as well as that there was no criminal history against the Defendant, the sentencing of the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because it is too unfasible to determine the sentencing of the lower court.

shall not be appointed by a person.

B. As to Defendant B (the prosecutor and Defendant B’s wrongful assertion of sentencing) the circumstances favorable to the Defendant are as follows.

In addition, the defendant shows a positive and consistent attitude toward the whole crime of this case, and actively cooperate with the investigation to resolve the case.

The Defendant agreed to the part of the victims (as the sum of damage, KRW 43 million) in the lower court’s judgment, and the victim interesting fire (the amount of damage 1.0 million) was in the first instance.