2. The crime of this case is determined by being provided with an alcoholic beverage equivalent to the sum of KRW 1,630,00,00 from the victims even though the defendant did not have the intent and ability to pay the alcohol value, and the defendant recognizes and reflects the crime of this case, and there is a change in the fact that the defendant has caused the crime of this case by the proof of alcohol, and there are favorable circumstances such as some aspects of the crime.

However, it is recognized that the amount of damage caused by the instant crime was not recovered at all, and that there was no fact that the Defendant agreed with the victim. The Defendant had been punished 14 times (2 times prior to and five times) for fraud in the past. In particular, on June 1, 2012, the court sentenced two years to imprisonment by fraud, etc. on the part of this court on March 14, 2014, again committed the instant crime during the repeated crime period after the enforcement of the sentence was completed, and again committed the instant crime. The criminal facts before the judgment are also stolen by the Defendant with the drinking value by the same method as the instant crime, and the nature of the crime is very poor. As a result of applying the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court Sentencing Commission Sentencing, recommending the instant crime as a result of the application of the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Commission Sentencing, the lower court sentenced the Defendant to the lowest sentence favorable to the Defendant, taking into account the aforementioned circumstances, and it is difficult to view that the lower court’s new sentencing records and the circumstances of the instant crime and the changes in circumstances.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is without merit.