A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of suspended execution for six months of imprisonment, and 80 hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. The appellate court’s judgment is reasonable to respect the sentencing condition in comparison with the first instance court where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

The court below found that the crime of this case was committed under the premise of marriage by deceiving the victim by using the personal trust relationship with the victim, and by deceiving the money borrowed from the lending company in the name of the victim on several occasions, and then the victim borrowed money from the lending company under the name of the victim. The crime of this case is not proper in light of the criminal law and form, the circumstances of the crime and the relationship with the victim, etc., and the crime of this case is more than 52 million won in total, and the amount acquired from the victim through this crime exceeds 52 million won in total, and most of the money received from the victim was used for Internet gambling or game expenses, etc., and it appears that the defendant did not agree with the victim until now, it appears that the defendant all committed the crime, and that the deception was active, and that this case appears to have been made efforts to recover damage, such as repaying the victim's total sum of 40 million won after the indictment, and there is no special change in circumstances that are favorable to the defendant.

In addition, examining the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances after the crime, the circumstances after the crime, and the record of the crime in this case, the punishment of the court below against the defendant is too heavy or unreasonable.