A. In light of the fact that the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes in the trial at the lower court, and used all of the money received from the victims as investment money, etc., dolusent intent of fraud is recognized, and that some of the amount of living expenses was paid to the victims, etc., the lower court’s punishment (two years of imprisonment for a period of eight months suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the fact that the amount of the fraud by the prosecutor of the instant crime is reasonable, the damage was not recovered, and the victim obtained a loan and lent the loan to the defendant, thereby causing the damage, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too unfeasible and unfair.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. Since the current Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, has a unique area in the sentencing determination, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing determination in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). B.

The circumstances alleged by the defendant as favorable sentencing factors in the grounds of appeal and the circumstances alleged by the prosecutor as unfavorable sentencing factors against the defendant in the grounds of appeal are deemed to have been fully considered in the original instance. While the defendant was in the appellate instance and appeared to have committed all of the instant crimes, considering the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court's punishment is deemed to be reasonable, and it cannot be deemed to be too heavy or unreasonable.

3. The appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.