2. The following determination is an unfavorable circumstance to the Defendant.

The crime of this case was committed only by the defendant as the manager of the studio building, but it did not have been delegated to the owner of the house with the authority to conclude the lease contract. However, the crime of this case was committed by receiving money as the security deposit from the victim by fraudulent means, and it is not good to commit the crime.

The amount of defraudation is 17 million won, and the amount of 11.5 million won out of the amount of damage has not yet been recovered.

The defendant committed the crime of this case even though he was sentenced to suspended sentence due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (not after the accident).

On the other hand, the following conditions are favorable.

Defendant reflects on crimes.

Until the time the judgment of the court of first instance was rendered, 4.7 million won out of the amount of damage was repaid to the victim, and 80,000 won was additionally repaid in the trial and efforts was made to recover the damage.

The defendant has no record of criminal punishment for the same crime.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances following the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, etc., and various sentencing conditions shown in the instant records and pleadings, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.