The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding the facts) did not have acquired insurance money by deceit as stated in the judgment below, but the court below recognized the establishment of fraud against the defendant. Thus, the court below erred in the misapprehension of facts.

2. Determination

A. On March 9, 2010, the facts charged in this part of the facts charged are as follows: (a) driving of HMW car on the side of G middle school located in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F on March 23:3, 2010 on the side of G middle school located in Songpa-gu, and (b) receiving JM5 car that the Defendant was driven by the Defendant, and (c) E was called “H vehicle while driving the H vehicle.”

“To receive the insurance.”

However, in fact, the above accident was caused intentionally by deceiving the victim in collusion with the defendant, I, E, and K, and there was no obligation for the victim to pay insurance money.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, etc. concealed the above points to the victim and received KRW 9,50,00 as the repair cost of the vehicle on March 9, 2010; KRW 1,190,00 as the name of the agreement on March 12, 2010; KRW 105,410 as the name of the medical treatment on March 15, 2010; and the Defendant received KRW 1,190,00 as the name of the agreement on March 12, 2010; KRW 113,910 as the name of the medical treatment expenses on March 15, 2010; KRW 430,00 as the name of the automobile repair cost; KRW 243,00 as the condition of the automobile repair expense; KRW 204,00 as the condition of the automobile siren; and KRW 200,006,320 as the condition of the vehicle siren; and

Accordingly, the defendant, in collusion with I, E, and K, acquired the property from the damaged person.

B. The court below and the party deliberation 1) The court below held that the defendant acquired the property by deception in collusion with I, E, and K on the basis of each evidence as stated in the judgment.

On the other hand, the defendant recognized the crime of fraud.

2) The following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court and the first instance court, i.e., a person who is in an internal relationship with the Defendant; K is obviously a person who has been engaged in an internal relationship with the Defendant; and K has publicly recruited in advance with regard to the instant traffic accident; and ② K is the Defendant and the instant case at the lower court.