2. We examine the judgment, and the defendant asserts that the whole crime of this case is recognized and his mistake is against the depth of his own mistake in the first instance trial before the prosecution of this case is instituted. 2-A of the second case before the prosecution of this case is instituted.

It returned 80,000,000 won out of 100,000 won to the victim F of the crime, and 2-0,000 won at the time of original adjudication.

As to a crime case, the first written judgment on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) and the crime of uttering of a falsified document should be considered together with the case in which the first written judgment on the criminal facts has become final at the time of original judgment, and the defendant has contributed to the State as a person of distinguished service in the Vietnam War, and the fact that the

However, each of the instant fraud crimes committed by the Defendant is not less than the nature of the crime in light of the content, method, degree of damage, etc. of the crime, and the Defendant committed each of the instant frauds during the period of suspension of execution due to the same kind of crime without being aware of the fact that the Defendant had been subjected to two suspended executions due to frauds, up to now, the victims have not been agreed or fully recovered from damage, and the lower court did not fully take into account the circumstances of the Defendant, within the scope of the recommended sentence (general fraud, type 1 (less than KRW 100,000), type 1 (less than KRW 100,000), and category 2 of Article 2-B.

There is no special change in circumstances that can reduce the punishment for the crime and that there is no special change in circumstances in which the court below can reduce the punishment for this part of the crime at the time of original adjudication.

The exemption of the lower court from punishment for a crime is impossible to be judged disadvantageous to the Defendant.