The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for eight months and for four months, respectively.

(2).

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of facts did not have conspired with Defendant A to commit fraud as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below. (2) The sentence of the court below on unreasonable sentencing (one month of imprisonment, one year of suspended execution, one year of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below as to the Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts, i.e., ① the facts charged in this case and the facts charged in the judgment of the court below, although there was no accident that Defendant B driven a vehicle from the central line while driving the vehicle from the vehicle from the engine, and the said vehicle was placed on the reservoir, the Defendants made a false report to the victim company that Defendant B driven the vehicle as above. ② After the occurrence of this case, the Defendants made a false report to the victim company to the effect that Defendant B driven the vehicle while Defendant B driven the vehicle at the site of this case, and the Defendant also made a false report to the effect that Defendant B was driving the vehicle at the site of this case, and the fact that Defendant B reported to the same content is recognized. In light of the above, the fact that Defendant

Even if Defendant A, who is not a policyholder, actually driving, reported to the victim company as if Defendant B was driven by Defendant B, can be deemed as a deception for the purpose of acquiring insurance proceeds. Defendant A stated to the effect that the accident reported to the insurance company in the trial itself was false, and Defendant B appears to have a close relation, such as lending his name to Defendant A and allowing the purchase of the instant vehicle and the purchase of the insurance.