A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On February 26, 2015, the Defendant filed a claim for insurance money with the purport that “the Defendant was on board the back seat of the EXE car at around 23:00 on February 24, 2015, and the Defendant got hospital treatment because the EXE car was shocked due to the shock of the EXE car and received hospital treatment,” with the effect that “the Defendant was on board the back seat of the EXEE car at around 23:00 on February 24, 2015.”

However, in fact, the defendant stopped EXE vehicle and divided the conversations with the vehicle. At the time of the accident, the defendant did not get on board EXE vehicle and did not receive hospital treatment because he did not get on EXE.

On March 3, 2015, the Defendant received 1,200,000 won from the victim to the single bank account (D) under the name of the Defendant as insurance money.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of the E, F, and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on accident site photographs;

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. Imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order;

1. Scope of recommendations on the sentencing guidelines: Fraudulent crimes committed between one month to one year, general fraud, type 1 (less than KRW 100 million) and the area of mitigation (where the penalty is not imposed or considerable damage is recovered);

2. Specific grounds for sentencing - the circumstance where there is no record of criminal punishment against the defendant on the ground that the defendant reflects the crime of this case, and that the victim did not want to be punished against the defendant on the ground that the damage recovery was made. - The crime of this case is not suitable for the crime of this case because it is the case where the defendant who did not board the vehicle involved in the accident using the occurrence of traffic accident is the case where the insurance money was stolen by the insurance company, as if the defendant was aboard the vehicle involved in the accident using the occurrence of the accident.