2. We examine the judgment, and the fact that the Defendant recognized all of his mistake and seriously reflects it, used part of the defrauded money to the actual construction, and endeavored to complete the construction under the victim’s additional cost, is favorable to the Defendant.

However, the crime of this case is committed by deceiving a victim who was preparing for the operation of a Kapet, and most of them were taken into consideration as gambling funds. In light of the criminal history, method and scale of damage, etc., the liability for the crime is grave, the damage is insufficient, and the defendant was not taken out from the victim. The defendant was sentenced to a two-year imprisonment with prison labor for up to May 2016 and was again committed during the period of the suspended execution, and there is an unfavorable circumstance to the defendant. In full view of all the sentencing conditions in the arguments of this case, including the defendant's character, character, age, family relationship, motive, circumstance, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, change of circumstances after the sentence of the court below, etc., the punishment of the court below is deemed to be within a reasonable and appropriate scope, and it cannot be deemed to be excessively unfair.

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.