2. In the first instance of the judgment, it is favorable to the defendant that the above victim does not want punishment against the defendant by agreement with the victimJ, that the defendant paid part of installments to the victim non-Ni Capital Co., Ltd. and returned the vehicle to the victim E, and that the defendant returned 9.7 million won out of the amount acquired by deceit to the victim E.

However, the fact that the defendant acquired the amount from the victims due to the crime of this case and the value of the bonds of automobile mortgage is a large amount, and that the defendant has a large number of the same kind and different kinds of crimes are disadvantageous.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the fact that there is no special change in circumstances that the court below and the punishment are different in the sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

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.