2. In light of the fact that the Defendant agreed with AC, AB, AD, Z, X, and AA among the victims of each of the instant crimes in the trial, but the amount obtained by deception of the said victims does not reach 1/10 of the total amount obtained by deception due to each of the instant crimes, it is difficult to view that the said circumstance alone alone is insufficient to reverse the judgment of the lower court and that the condition of sentencing was changed to the extent that the sentence against the Defendant is to

Furthermore, in light of various sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments of the instant case including the period and frequency of each of the instant crimes, the number of victims, the records of the Defendant’s past crimes, and the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes even during the period of repeated crimes, and in particular, continued to commit the crime even after being prosecuted for the instant crimes, etc., it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the lower court for the reasons indicated in its reasoning is too unreasonable.

3. 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 groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition.

However, pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the written judgment of the court below shall be corrected ex officio as follows:

Each " Jeju" in the second and tenth Forms 2 and 10 of the judgment of the court below shall be deemed to be each " Jeju."

The 15th page of the judgment of the court below (11) to 12th page of the 15th page of the judgment of the court below shall be "the details of the withdrawal and withdrawal transaction" as "each details of the withdrawal and withdrawal transaction", and the next specifications of deposit transactions shall be added