2. Determination

A. It is recognized that the Defendant confessions the instant crime and reflects the Defendant, and that the Defendant has little visual capability in one eye.

B. However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the sum of the instant fraud and the embezzlement is a large amount of KRW 17 million in total; (b) the Defendant was punished for a crime under the same veterinary method six times; (c) the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for four months on September 15, 2015 and was sentenced to a two-year imprisonment for the crime of embezzlement on September 15, 2015, and again committed the instant crime without being aware of it during the suspension period; (d) the victims have not been agreed upon; (e) there was no special change in circumstances after the lower judgment was sentenced; and (e) there was no change in circumstances after the sentence was issued; and (e) other circumstances favorable to the Defendant, which are conditions for sentencing specified in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, background, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s sentence 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.