2. The judgment does not seem to have led the crime of this case committed systematically by the defendant, and there are favorable circumstances for the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant recognized his mistake and alternatively reflects it. However, the crime of this case is deemed to have been committed by deceiving the national housing fund for low-income groups operated with public funds by systematically sharing the role of the crime of this case. In light of the circumstances that the defendant participated in the crime of this case, the circumstance that the defendant took part in the crime of this case by pretending to a false tenant, the details of the crime of the defendant who took part in full amount of the loan, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the liability for the crime is not easy, the damage has not been recovered until the trial, the defendant committed the crime of this case again during the period of repeated crime, and other factors of punishment, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, health conditions, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime of this case, and the equality of punishment with the accomplice and accomplice, it is not recognized that the punishment of the court below is too unfair.

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