2. The lower court, based on the favorable circumstances, determined the sentencing conditions in the records and arguments, including the motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, and the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Committee, by taking account of the following factors: (a) the Defendants were punished for the same kind of crime; and (b) the Defendants committed the same kind of crime during the period of repeated crime.

Defendant

A The grounds for unfair sentencing alleged by the lower court appear to be the circumstances in which the lower court had already taken full account of the Defendant’s punishment, and there are no circumstances to deem that the said sentencing conditions have changed in the appellate court.

In light of the above sentencing conditions, the lower court’s punishment is appropriate and too unreasonable.

Defendant

Even if B cooperates with the investigation of other fraudulent cases or partly led to a certain crime, in light of the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime even though he/she was punished several times by theft of or by deceptioning the answer bags, etc. by means of pretending the guest in the wedding hall, as in the instant crime during the period of repeated crime, it is necessary to punish the Defendant. Therefore, it cannot be said that the lower court’s punishment is too excessive and unreasonable.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.