beta
Text
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendants’ misunderstanding of the facts and the vehicles owned by Defendant B and the vehicles owned by Defendant A claim insurance money to the insurance company at the time when the traffic accident actually occurred, and the Defendants did not claim insurance money by pretending that there was a false accident in collusion.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts that affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The lower court’s sentence (the Defendants: KRW 2 million each of the fines) that Defendant A and C alleged unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.
2. Judgment on the Defendants’ assertion of mistake of facts
A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the owner of the EAD car, Defendant B is the driver of the F K5 car, Defendant C is the regular manager of the military GG industry company, and Defendant C is the husband of Defendant B.
In the case of external vehicles, the Defendants knew that the insurance company would pay cash prior to the repair of the vehicle in the name of the repair cost, and conspired to acquire the vehicle of Defendant A and the vehicle of Defendant B in the name of the repair cost by receiving the repair cost by pretending to have a traffic accident as if the accident occurred.
Defendant
B On July 5, 2016, around 02:35, at the I parking lot located at H in the Gunsan-si, the fact is that the Defendant A was parked and the FK5 passenger cars operated by Defendant B were not in the part of the accident. However, even though the victim KB non-life insurance Co., Ltd. received the accident as if the damage occurred due to Defendant B’s negligence, and claimed the insurance money, and it was paid 8,000,000 won to the Defendant’s account from the damaged person for the unpaid repair cost.
Accordingly, the Defendants conspired to deception the victim and received property from the injured party as above.
B. The lower court’s judgment is legitimate.