A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one year and two months) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Each of the crimes of this case is deemed to have committed the crime of this case by deceiving two victims who were attending the same workplace in a short period of time for the purpose of using them for gambling funds, and by deceiving them totaling KRW 130 million. In light of the circumstances of the crime, period and frequency of the crime, relationship with the victims, etc., the crime is heavy.

Except that the victims paid a considerable amount of 12 million won to the victims C due to the instant crime, damage has not yet been recovered, and the victims did not receive a letter of indemnity from the victims.

Considering these circumstances, the sentence of sentence on the defendant is inevitable.

However, the Defendant is against the recognition of the entire crime of this case, and there is no particular record of crime except for those subject to a fine of KRW 1.5 million due to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning Regulation and Punishment of Speculative Acts, Etc. around 2010.

In addition to these circumstances, in full view of the following factors: (a) type 2 (the same concurrent crime between general frauds; (b) the determination of the type, 10 million won, and less than 50 million won [the scope of the recommendation area and the scope of the recommendation] basic area; (c) the basic area of the defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; (d) the sentencing conditions as shown in the instant records and arguments, including the circumstances after the crime; and (e) the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Sentencing Committee of the Supreme Court (amended by 8 to 4 years); and (e) the amount of punishment imposed by the court below on the defendant.