2. The judgment of the Defendant reflects the instant crime in depth, and the fact that the Defendant is old and healthy is not good is a favorable condition.

However, it is necessary to respect the judgment of the court below because there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the court below because new sentencing data have not been submitted in the trial at the court below. In full view of the following facts, the sentencing of the court below is too unreasonable, considering the following facts: (a) the defendant uses several new names by using personal trust relations with victims; (b) misrepresentation of them as public prosecutors; or misrepresentation of them as public prosecutors; (c) the fact that multiple victims have occurred; (d) the total sum of the amount of fraud exceeds 90 million won; (b) the victims have failed to agree with the victims; (c) there is no possibility that damage may be repaid; (d) the crime of this case has been repeatedly committed even though three years of punishment was sentenced due to fraud; and (e) other various circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime; (e) the character and behavior of the defendant; and (e) the defendant's environment

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.