2. It is true that there are favorable circumstances, such as: (a) there are circumstances that may be considered in the circumstances after the crime, such as: (b) the Defendant’s misunderstanding in depth and punishment was committed; (c) returned voluntarily to Korea; and (d) returned voluntarily; and (c) the benefit gained by the instant crime appears to be too large; and (d) the fact that the present health situation seems to be insufficient.

However, the so-called "Sishing" fraud in this case led to the crime of this case in a systematic and planned manner with other accomplices, which is the form of crime that is highly severe and highly likely to be subject to criticism. The defendant actively participated in the crime of this case as a role in the field marketing in China; the defendant was investigated as a crime No. 2 of the crime of this case in the holding of the court below; and the defendant continued to commit the crime No. 1 of the crime of this case in the holding of the court below; and the defendant's age, sex, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime. In full view of all the sentencing conditions specified in the argument of this case, the court below's punishment is too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

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.