2. The judgment of the defendant has reached the trial for the first time, and all of the crimes of this case are recognized and reflected, and the fact that the defendant does not want the punishment of the defendant under an agreement with the victim of the larceny of this case is favorable to the defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant has already been punished for the same kind of crime, and the crime of fraud of this case was committed by the defendant without being aware of the fact that the defendant committed without being aware of the fact that it was committed during the period of repeated crime, up to now, there was no letter of suspicion from the victim of the crime of this case or any agreement with the above victim, and there was no other smooth agreement with the above victim. In addition, the sentencing of the court below is not sufficient to the extent that the sentencing of the court below exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion even considering the various sentencing factors in the proceedings of the argument of this case including the defendant

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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.