2. The judgment that the defendant recognized the facts of the crime, partly repaid the victims the amount of damage, and that the defendant has no record of the crime is favorable to the defendant.

However, in full view of the various circumstances, such as the defendant's age, family relations, environment, sexual conduct, motive, circumstance before and after the crime, etc., the punishment imposed by the court below is too unreasonable, and thus, the defendant's improper assertion of sentencing is not accepted. The defendant's punishment cannot be accepted, in light of the following circumstances: (a) the amount of money that the defendant trusted the defendant as a worker in the past was acquired by deception from the victims; (b) the amount that the defendant provided to the victims is not sufficient to recover the victims' damage; (c) the details and methods of deception are not sufficient; (d) the victim's defense for repayment was consistent with the victim's demand; and (e) some victims want to punish the defendant.

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.