2. It is recognized that the determination is based on the following: (a) the fact that the Defendant recognized and reflected his own crime; and (b) the fact that the Defendant appears to have caused the instant crime in the course of carrying out the business in an unreasonable manner.

However, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant did not agree with the victim until the Defendant was in the trial; and (b) the damage is not recovered; and (c) the amount of the damage is equitable with the criminal punishment for the fraud of the scale of damage similar to the instant crime; and all the sentencing conditions indicated in the record, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, the background of the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, even if considering the circumstances cited in the grounds of appeal, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable. Therefore, the Defendant’s above assertion

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.