2. The fact that the judgment of the court below made the confession of the crime of this case and reflects his mistake, that the degree of deception is weak, that part of the amount of deception is used to the construction of this case, and that the balance with the judgment of the first head of the crime of this case as stated in the judgment below should be considered at the same time with the final judgment

However, the fact that the defraudation amount (10 million won) is a large amount, that is used in the instant construction, that is, the victim has received advance payment from the victim and used it for the progress of other construction, that is, the damage has not been recovered, and that the victim has been punished with a fine once for the same crime, that is, three times a fine for the same crime, and that there has been three times a fine for the same crime is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances leading to the instant crime, including the circumstances and motive, the circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, the age of the Defendant, character and conduct, family relationship, environment, occupation, etc., and the conditions of sentencing as shown in the oral proceedings, the sentencing guidelines do not apply to cases falling under latter concurrent crimes of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, the sentencing guidelines do not apply.

Since the sentence of the court below seems to be too unreasonable, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is not accepted.

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