The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding, misunderstanding of the legal doctrine, the Defendant did not intentionally cause a traffic accident and attempted to receive an insurance agreement, pretending to have suffered injury.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s determination as to the assertion of mistake and misapprehension of the legal doctrine are as follows: (i) the Defendant, while waiting in the site of the accident of this case on the wheel chairs, walked along the road on which a vehicle operated by C is capable of one-way traffic; (ii) the Defendant discovered the Defendant and stopped the vehicle under a distance from the front wheelchairs; (iii) the Defendant was in contact with the vehicle of C operation by driving the front wheelchairs; (iv) the Defendant reported the vehicle to C as one-way passage; and (iv) the Defendant complained of the instant vehicle to NN employee affiliated with the said vehicle, who was affiliated with the said vehicle, and (v) the Defendant did not want to receive the repair cost of the front wheelchairs and inspection cost; and (v) the Defendant did not want to receive the payment of the same; and (v) the Defendant did not want to receive the same from the front chairs, but did not want to receive the same on his own, but did not want to do so.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. The Defendant is a disabled person of the third degree with disability in determining the unfair argument of sentencing.

There is no criminal offense exceeding the fine against the defendant.

This is.