2. The circumstances favorable to the defendant are that the defendant recognized each of the crimes of this case and reflected, that the defendant has no record of being punished for the same crime, and that there is no record of punishment exceeding the suspended execution.

However, each of the crimes of this case was committed by the defendant in violation of his duties as a leading owner, thereby taking property benefits equivalent to the deposit money, and acquired money from three other victims under the name of the loan, the deposit money, and the university registration fee. In addition, in light of the Criminal Procedure Act and the degree of damage, the nature of the crime is not less than that of the other victims, the damage amount also exceeds 72,850,000 won, the defendant did not make a serious effort to pay damages, and the defendant did not reach an agreement with the defendant and the victims up to the trial. The fact that the damage was not recovered is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In full view of the above favorable circumstances and conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstances after the commission of the crime, and other various circumstances, which are conditions for sentencing as shown in the trial process, even if considering all favorable circumstances for the Defendant, it cannot be deemed unfair since the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable. Thus, 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 the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.